Even Democrats Think Newsom’s Idea to Redraw California Districts is Ridiculous
“That’s insane. That’s a crazy hill to die on.”
California Gov. Gavin Newsom blabs about Texas supposedly gerrymandering its Congressional district maps because President Donald Trump wants Texas to redraw its congressional district map to pick up five more seats.
Instead of taking the high road, Newsom has decided to do the exact same thing! Because intelligence!
The idea has even received backlash from California Democrats. From Politico:
It’s a proposal capturing the imagination of a Democratic Party spoiling for another fight with Republicans and desperate to regain a foothold in Washington. This week, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries privately huddled with members of the California delegation to discuss redistricting at the bloc’s weekly lunch. And in California, text threads are ablaze with discussions of what a redraw would look like, who would benefit, and how it would affect active efforts to recruit candidates and raise money.
But it’s also a longshot. And to many Democrats in Newsom’s home state, it’s a new obsession bordering on bizarre — or even anti-democratic.
“Trying to save democracy by destroying democracy is dangerous and foolish,” said Assemblymember Alex Lee, the head of the state Legislature’s Progressive Caucus. “By legitimizing the race to the bottom of gerrymandering, Democrats will ultimately lose.”
Or as one Democratic political consultant granted anonymity to speak freely put it, “The idea of taking away the power from the citizens and giving it back to the politicians — the optics of that is horrendous and indefensible.”
The consultant said, “That’s insane. That’s a crazy hill to die on.”
Well, the California legislature does not draw the district map.
California’s independent redistricting commission tackles the issue every ten years, led by the citizens.
Newsom is trying to find a way. From KCRA:
Newsom said Wednesday option one involves calling a special election to take the state’s redistricting process back to the voters. Constitutional amendments in California first require a 2/3 vote from state lawmakers before the issue heads to voters.
Option two involves calling on the California Legislature to quickly redraw the congressional district maps before the 2026 election. Elections expert Paul Mitchell posted on X Wednesday the state constitution says nothing about a mid-decade redraw for Congressional maps, which may or may not allow the legislature to do it.
“I was one of, at the time, a few Democrats that supported independent redistricting,” the governor told reporters in Los Angeles. “At the same time, I’m very fearful about what’s going on in this country.”
Newsom, pointing to Texas, said, “they’re playing by a different set of rules.”
“We can sit on the sidelines and talk about the way the world should be, or we could recognize the existential nature that is this moment,” Newsom said.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Newscome is such scum. Seriously who voted for this clown? Don’t you have any self-respect?
I’m a SoCal Republican. My vote no longer matters
Has it mattered since about 1988?
1. Everything the Democrat Party does is undemocratic.
2. All Newsom’s ideas are ridiculous.
3. Newsom’s claims that others play by different rules is inane, and indicates he has absolutely no self-awareness.
He is completely correct in this case that Texas plays by different rules than California. That’s because it’s a different state. He’s free to try to change California’s rules if he likes, but right now CA’s rules don’t allow him to do what the Rs are doing in TX. TX’s rules do allow it. That’s just how federalism works.
Just wait until 2030, you’ll have to redraw after losing the illegals from your inflated population count. It’ll even be easier, since you’ll have fewer districts to come up with.
bs
they DONT NEED TO RE DRAW anything they will and /or heavyily dems no matter what
so if they are doing it in texas…who is getting closer to blue I would bet than CA getting closer to gop..it would make sense
what doesnt make sense is the fact that redrawing districts wasnt found to be illegal ……
Well, DC, take a look at the history of gerrymandering. It was first done over 200 years ago in Massachusetts by Eldridge Gerry. The newly formed district looked like a salamander, hence the portmanteau neologism.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Gerry-Mander_Edit.png
How about adding one required factor for CD to end up, after reapportionment among the States, with a roughly equivalent distribution of US Citizens of voting age within each CD say within 10%? Doesn’t impact distribution among States. Does force States to draw CD so that there is minimal dilution of the political power of each Citizen’s vote. There’s some CD in big States with less than 100K US Citizens while a neighboring CD has 2x or 3x that amount. This has the practical effect of diluting the power of the individual votes within the CD with much larger Citizen populations compared to neighboring CD. IMO once this is added it blows up much of the redistricting shenanigans b/c it will be difficult to comply with while still maintaining the status quo shenanigans.
That would take an amendment, and if you’re doing that already then just amend it to what it ought to have been in the first place: Leave it up to each state to decide who can vote, but the census should only count eligible voters under state law.
Nope, just a change to the VRA. No Constitutional amendment needed to create redistricting criteria to draw permissible CD. Your view would throw out all the current criteria required to be used.
Leave it up to States? Aside from basic traditional disqualification for voting…nope. Not for Federal elections ever..
Plus you are.creating an incentive to juice the census numbers by allowing a State to choose to count in Census illegal aliens. If anything we would strip that crap if we’re doing a Constitutional amendment and only count US Citizens and legal permanent resident aliens.
Oddly enough the old 1812 drawing of the “The Gerrymander” is one of the first things I remember from studying American history in college.
https://www.massmoments.org/moment-details/gerrymander-born-in-massachusetts.html
Sure, the Gerrymander is an evil corrupt and purely political thing…. but both parties like it that way, and it’s not unconstitutional. The Court has spoken:
Colegrove v. Green, 328 U.S. 549 (1946)
But due regard for the Constitution as a viable system precludes judicial correction. Authority for dealing with such problems resides elsewhere. Article I, § 4 of the Constitution provides that
“The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for . . . Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, . . .”
The short of it is that the Constitution has conferred upon Congress exclusive authority to secure fair representation by the States in the popular House, and left to that House determination whether States have fulfilled their responsibility. If Congress failed in exercising its powers, whereby standards of fairness are offended, the remedy ultimately lies with the people
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/328/549/#tab-opinion-1938775
California is a one party-ruled state because, in 1986, Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act granting amnesty to millions of illegals in exchange for tougher penalties on employers of illegals, penalties to be enforced under pain of being labeled a racist.
Lesson learned: never give in to sh*tlibs…not even the most infinitesimal iota.
We need an amendment that makes only a count of citizens determinative of a State’s representation in Congress. Counting resident aliens for this purpose creates an inequality of political authority between citizens of different States, as the proportion of non-citizen residents varies from State to State.
I’m not a fan of redrawing districts mid cycle, by anyone.
Likely there will be a citizenship question on the 2030 census, then the redistricting fun starts at both the federal and state level.
There can be a citizenship question, but it doesn’t impact representation, or districting.
That’s not a valid take. There is no high road. TX is planning a gerrymander, as is its right. If CA’s rules allowed him to do the same then he’d be 100% entitled to do so and no one could criticize him for it. But they don’t, so if he wants to do it he’ll first have to change the rules. If he can.
In Petteway v. Galveston County, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Voting Rights Act doesn’t permit ‘coalition’ minority-majority districts.
This means districts based on such criteria are no longer valid, and the DOJ sent Governor Abbott a letter stating that TX-9 (D), TX-18 (D), TX-29 (D), and TX-33 (D) are unconstitutional and need to be redrawn. Trump would also like to see Texas pick up 5 more Republican districts..
Three of the districts are in Houston – two of which are weird and angular but basically akin to interlocking C shapes, while the last is another weird angular vaguely S shaped district in Dallas.
It seems like Newsome is complaining about Texas needing to bring its districts back into conformity with the Constitution, but focusing on Republicans controlling the process to their benefit, and using that to defend efforts to turn California into a One Party State. Oh wait …!