Quick Take
Proposition 50 would redraw California’s congressional map to counter Texas Republicans’ gerrymandering — aiming to flip the House of Representatives blue and block President Donald Trump’s agenda. But, author Casey Beyer argues, it’s a symbolic gesture with little real power to change outcomes in Washington. Instead, it risks silencing minority viewpoints in California and deepening partisanship, Beyer argues. He believes fair representation — not political revenge — should guide our democracy.
Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.
I received my statewide special election pamphlet, which highlights Proposition 50, saying “this measure shall be known, and may be cited as the Election Rigging Response Act.”
It’s quite a title – and it’s asking a lot of voters. Too much, perhaps.
In Prop 50, California Democratic Party leaders have asked voters to approve a new map for California’s congressional districts to “fight fire with fire,” in response to Texas Republicans’ drawing a new map for their state’s congressional districts. The announced purpose is to turn the House of Representatives Democratic to check President Donald Trump.
The question for California voters is whether this gerrymandered effort will actually work.
Prop 50 has flaws that are not outlined in the measure’s language. There is no mention whether another state attempts to gerrymander its congressional districts – Missouri and Florida on the right and New York and Illinois on the left, for example. However, there is nothing House Democrats can do without a two-thirds majority in each house. Any bill they pass to constrain Trump will be vetoed by him, and it takes two-thirds of both houses to overturn a veto.
A Democratic House could stop Trump’s legislation from passing. But the Senate can already do that, since 60 votes are needed to break a Democratic filibuster, and Republicans have only 53 senators. That is exactly what is happening with the resolution to keep the government open and we see what power the Democrats already have.
It’s true that the Democratic senators couldn’t filibuster a budget reconciliation bill, but the “Big Beautiful Bill” has already been passed. The president placed everything he wanted from Congress into one bill. If Trump has other new ideas – he mentions unconventional and questionable ideas on a daily basis – unless they’re fiscally related, the Senate filibuster will stop them. If they are fiscally related, he’ll include them in next year’s budget reconciliation, which will go through before the redistricting has any effect.
As a result, there is nothing a Democratic majority in the House can do to stop Trump’s bills that Democratic senators cannot already do by filibuster, and there is nothing a Democratic House majority can do to pass its own laws if Trump disapproves.
The general concept is to stop the Trump administration, at all cost, from its unconstitutional attack on his enemies — blue states and blue cities around the country, and policies and programs that are directed at underserved communities.
Let’s say Prop 50 passes, and changes the makeup of House congressional seats to give the Democrats control of the House. What a House Democratic majority can do is hold hearings. And Democrats will – tons of them. They won’t get to subpoena any documents or any Trump administration officials.
If a Trump official is held in contempt of Congress, no enforcement will happen. President Barack Obama showed us that. His attorney general, Eric Holder, was held in contempt for withholding documents related to the “Fast and Furious” scandal. The Justice Department decides whether or not to prosecute for contempt of Congress.
No one prosecuted Holder.
The stonewall was successful. The shoe is on the other foot now, and the result will be the same. Attorney General Pam Bondi will not prosecute any Trump administration officials who are held in contempt of Congress.
What is the price Californians are asked to pay in Prop 50, in addition to the $200 million cost of a special election?
It effectively impacts those voters with views that are occasionally in the minority on national policies that affect Californians. Again, another question to California voters: Should there be a place for minority views among California House members?
There are currently 43 Democrats and nine Republicans representing California in Congress. Proposition 50 could change that to 48 Democrats and four Republicans. That’s 92.3% Democrats, representing a state that’s 45.3% Democratic.
Where is the bipartisan collaboration between congressmembers if there is no balance of representation?
Many issues vital to California come before Congress. Water policy is one, immigration is another, to name two. Californians have differing views on those important subjects, and we live with the consequences of what Congress enacts. Congressmembers from other states can easily ignore the views of just four out of 52 members as outliers as they would nine.
Another question to California voters: Should California send to Congress members representing a full spectrum of California citizens’ views, minority as well as majority?
Proposition 50 will most likely completely silence minority California viewpoints until January 2033, when California reverts to districts drawn by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission after the 2030 census. This occurs without any chance of changing any legislative outcomes.
Now, the final question to California voters who elected members to Congress in the newly created districts. Will the new member of Congress want to “give up” their temporary legislative seat during the redistricting for the 2032 election cycle?
In 2024, the reelection rate for incumbent members of the U.S. House of Representatives was approximately 97%-98%. In general, the reelection rate for congressional incumbents is consistently high, typically well over 90%. So the likelihood of a dramatic shift of California House members in the 2032 redistricting is slim.
Let me close by stating: I am not a fan of Trump and oppose everything his administration is doing to the very fabric of our democracy.
I stand with those folks who reflect the moral compass of a fair and nonpartisan election system. I have worked in both the Congress and the California Legislature, where bipartisan collaboration led to effective governance. In today’s political dynamics, we have lost the soul of governing for the people.
Casey Beyer served as the chief executive officer for the Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce from April 2017 to November 2024, following two years as the executive director of the Santa Cruz County Business Council and several years as the senior advisor to the president of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group. He brings more than three decades of experience in public policy, crisis communications, community relations and legislative affairs at the local, state and federal level. He has held senior-level positions advising members of Congress and the state Legislature as well as CEOs of Silicon Valley companies. He now resides in Monterey County.