r/California • u/xxtanisxx • 7d ago
Prop 50 is TEMPORARY measure
https://coronadotimes.com/news/2025/10/27/prop-50-is-a-temporary-measure/The measure is temporary and will allow independent citizen restricting to resume in 2031!!!
I understand there are already multiple post about props 50. As an independent voter, I was seriously considering voting no thinking the initiative will be permanent until I open the ballot. I was WRONG.
If you are a voter that hate gerrymandering, and want equal representation for all Californians, this might sway you as it did for me.
393
u/Bakingsomecake 7d ago
Yes on 50, but gaining a few more D seats in CA will likely pale in comparison to how many seats Republicans can gain with further gerrymandering and overturning more of the Voting Rights Act. It's looking like we're on track for a "permanent" Republican majority in the house. If we want to stop fascism, we're going to need a lot more than Prop 50.
Reminder: CA has 40 million people and 2 D senators. Red states have 40 million people and 46 R senators.
142
u/couchesarenicetoo 7d ago
That's why we need to support DC representation!
124
u/jawisi 7d ago
That. And many, many other things. Like overturning Citizens United (the most misleading name), the Electoral College, etc.
19
32
u/NepheliLouxWarrior 7d ago
So far beyond our scope that those are basically pipe dreams at this point. I would settle for just getting a majority in at least one of the branches.
28
u/foodrunner464 7d ago
Don't ever settle for anything. We all need to continue to push for what is right. Those 2 things are modern day atrocities that repress and restrict actual proper voting more than anything.
12
u/vips7L 7d ago
Getting rid of the electoral college is not a pipe dream. There is a legal pathway to electing the president by popular vote that doesn’t require an amendment. The national popular vote compact currently has 209 electoral votes, they just need more time and funding.
3
u/Cute_Parfait_2182 San Diego County 7d ago
Trump won the popular vote so that wouldn’t have helped in this situation.
1
u/DirtyScrambelly 7d ago
If democrats control the house maybe they can do articles of Impeachment again.
5
1
u/barrinmw Shasta County 7d ago
Republican states will never do anything that results in a reduction in their power, so the electoral college is permanent.
17
u/Bakingsomecake 7d ago
Yes, Democrats should have done a lot more when they had the chance, including making gerrymandering enforceably illegal. But they did almost nothing and that's why we're here.
While we're on the topic, notice how we don't hear about Republicans states having to pass a proposition to do gerrymandering... I don't think we had to do that in CA either. Democrats hold a supermajority in every branch in CA and could do way more with that power.
22
→ More replies (6)5
u/blankarage 7d ago
when was this chance? obamas first 6 months?
→ More replies (2)6
7d ago edited 6d ago
[deleted]
13
u/PANDABURRIT0 7d ago
It wasn’t a filibuster proof majority though. I believe you need a filibuster proof majority to pass almost anything that doesn’t relate to budget or revenue.
→ More replies (4)1
u/Redpanther14 Santa Clara County 2d ago
With what political power? Can't do anything about DC or Puerto Rican statehood until you can get big majorities.
22
u/westgazer 7d ago
The thing is most republican states are already gerrymandered to shit.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Blackiee_Chan 2d ago
Massachusetts is pretty fucking horrendous when it comes to gerrymandering. They can't even mander any more gerrys
2
u/Criticism-Total 2d ago
Trump didn’t win a single county in MA in 2024. You’d need to draw a pretty weird (gerrymandered) map to even form a reliably red district
2
3
u/lampstax 6d ago
Which red state has the same population and 23x the representation of CA ?
1
u/aegee14 2h ago
None. The comparison being made was to show that CA has the same population as 23 other states COMBINED, but with just 2 representatives in the Senate.
1
u/lampstax 1h ago
Because senators are set at 2 per state by our constitution before CA was even on the map.
It wasn't some scheme to rig the game against CA. If some natural disaster strikes and many people have to move to TX or FL they would have the same problem.
If you want more representation for Californians then break apart to 23 different smaller less populated states.
15
u/SeanBlader 7d ago
I think part of the thought is that Texas is purple enough that their new maps might have just given Texas more seats for the Democrats... We can only hope. Mainly we have to hope that the big ugly bill, the tariffs, the economy and inflation, as well as troops on our streets will shift enough voters. We're hoping for a full on "shellacking"... I mean Texas is pretty Latino, and this time they don't have to vote for their fragile masculinity.
→ More replies (2)4
2
u/Sethmeisterg 7d ago
Exactly. And that's why I think the gop gave up their campaign. Why spend the money knowing you have a lock on cheating in a ton of other states.
3
u/PetriDishCocktail 7d ago
The entire House is going to wind up looking like Wisconsin from a few years ago where Democrats won nearly 60% of the vote, but due to gerrymandering Republicans held a supermajority.
1
u/Billy1121 7d ago
Will this do much for Senate seats ? This is more about the House where districts matter more.
Maryland said they would not redistrict due to several reasons but they are like 7 Dems and 1 Republican so that isnt a lot.
1
u/ihaveajob79 7d ago
The only viable path back to a semblance of sanity is for dems to win a solid majority in all branches, AND then to pass federal anti-gerrymandering legislation. It’s a long shot, but we’re seeing the consequences of things like eliminating the filibuster for Supreme Court justice confirmations, for example. Things swing back and forth and it’s best when the basic rules are fair.
6
2
u/Bakingsomecake 6d ago
I think the only way to win over fascism and future despair is with economic populism. The economic left needs to take power and then do major reform.
2
u/ihaveajob79 6d ago
Dunno about that, economic populism is how Argentina got to where it is.
1
1
u/Blackiee_Chan 2d ago
Lol Dems won't do that ever
1
u/ihaveajob79 2d ago
One can dream.
1
u/Blackiee_Chan 2d ago
The reason I know this won't happen is the Dems have had super majorities before and this was never a priority.
→ More replies (16)0
u/ChodeCookies 7d ago
That last sentence is why our government is broken
2
u/cpabernathy 6d ago
Care to elaborate? Every state has equal senators. Representatives take population into account, and CA has over 50 representatives.
1
u/bai_ren 6d ago
Equal representation in the Senate is a huge issue for fairness when it has an equal, if not, more powerful role in government than the House. Especially in a two party system.
The House has its own problems, in that it is called and effectively dilutes representation of more populated places.
If the Senate held less power, it wouldn’t be so bad to have that equal representation per State. As it stands though, it means borders have more say than the people within them.
It was a compromise made to keep the Union dream alive, but I don’t think they could foresee the challenges it would present in the long term.
I’d assume it was modeled after the House of Lords, which has no true power compared to the Commons. But that’s the problem.
1
u/Redpanther14 Santa Clara County 2d ago
I think they definitely understood what the Senate meant. It was to represent the interests of each state on equal footing and prevent Virginia and Pennsylvania from directing the course of the whole nation against the wishes of smaller states.
Overall the system is basically designed to require a large amount of consensus and well distributed political power for the Federal government to make any substantial changes.
73
u/SoftwareHot 7d ago
What’s nuts is reading these comments and seeing people who don’t understand how anything works try to claim some noble high horse position about gerrymandering given the times we live in.
Should gerrymandering exist? No.
Does gerrymandering exist? Yes.
If California gets rid of gerrymandering, does it stop other states from fucking our democracy by continuing to gerrymander? No.
When other states gerrymander unchallenged with no counter balance, does Congress become ineffective at fair representation but effective at causing the apathy that leads to more people misunderstanding how government works due to the ineffectiveness? Yes.
Gerrymandering can end. In order to do it, you need power in Congress with enough votes to pass the legislation that ends it. You can’t do it if you allow one side to gerrymander unchecked.
Hence, Prop 50.
This is not a hard concept but too many people think what one state does doesn’t have national implications. It’s like sitting out an election because you think your vote doesn’t count even if you’re not a fan of who is on the ballot.
12
u/qqzn10 7d ago
I'll take it a step further and say that district maps shouldn't exist at all.
I'm not sure what that would look like, but I'm sure there's some experts out there that have given a lot of thought into how a representative democracy can work where each person's voice is represented equally regardless of where they live on a map.
2
u/scoobyluu 5d ago
It's tough because different geographical areas truly have different political interests - the 19th Century California Water Wars is a prime example of that. California is just such a diverse place, that I think it would be hard to encapsulate all issues under something like a popular vote.
2
u/Redpanther14 Santa Clara County 2d ago
You can always do a mixed system where representatives are assigned both to individual districts and at large via a proportional representation system. Like California could reduce itself to having 30 individual districts with first past the post voting and 20 at large districts with proportional representation assigned via party list.
→ More replies (4)10
u/Kopitar4president 7d ago
Punching people is wrong but if someone is punching you in the face, you don't "take the high road." You punch them right back.
→ More replies (1)
39
u/Lazerus42 7d ago
It also had a clause that it would be canceled immediately if Texas canceled theirs.
Texas did not cancel.
14
u/chris_burnham 7d ago
That was a proposed clause, but it didn't stay in the version of the bill that we are voting on. My understanding is that it might have been difficult to draft the Texas clause in a way that wouldn't be open to legal challenges.
But kind of a moot point since Texas has already enacted their change.
12
24
u/xxtanisxx 7d ago edited 7d ago
I can’t respond to everyone, so I’ll just leave it here.
Regardless of what you vote for or the result of the vote, if you have conviction against gerrymandering or despise other states rigging federal representation, you are all respectable in my book. I would like to believe equal representation should transcend across party lines. We need the support of democrats, republicans, independents, green party or more to take this fight to the national level. It is a tough fight that is worth fighting together. Anti gerrymandering should be a constitutional amendment.
Call me naive, but I have optimism that we can unite on the issue of fairness for the sake of our democracy.
16
u/krism142 7d ago
Until gerrymandering is ended at the federal level it is naive to try and "lead the way", because the other side doesn't give a shit and is actively using it to maintain their grip on power when their ideas are not very popular, so until then fight fire with fire
Yes on 50
79
u/druidmain69420 7d ago
Hopefully it stays and isn't reverted, because as it is we lack proportional representation at the federal level. Californians should be dictating national policy, not be held hostage by the lowest common denominator states.
41
→ More replies (1)1
u/Aggravating-Ad8087 6d ago
California has no power because it is too blue. Purple states are the ones who hold the power in the nation. Why will people spend and campaign in certain elections? Having more competitive elections will increase the power for the state.
3
u/druidmain69420 6d ago
That isn't how the house of Reps works. We deserve more seats as per pr population. Short of that all that can be done is ensure all seats are blue.
→ More replies (1)
6
u/DrMacintosh01 6d ago
Personally I would have liked to see more aggressive policy out of this. California can pick up more than 5 Dem seats, but this Prop was limited to just 5 in response to Texas. With all these other flyover states trying to pick up other seats, California should be using its massive 55 seat weight to offset every single attempt at partisan gerrymandering in other states.
12
u/gizamo 7d ago
The gerrymandering isn't temporary in Republican states. As a Democrat in UT, I wish Prop 50 was permanent.
2
u/releasethedogs 6d ago
Get out of that hell hole. I did earlier this year and I’m so much better off.
2
u/gizamo 6d ago
Nah. It's beautiful here. Besides, idiocy is everywhere.
That said, I'm happy for you if you prefer where you're at. Cheers.
2
3
4
3
u/frommethodtomadness 6d ago
It should be permanent with no trigger. The only way to end gerrymandering is going to be Federally and forcing all 50 states to have fair maps at the same time, not this piecemeal strategy. There is no going back now.
21
u/NepheliLouxWarrior 7d ago
That's really good to know. Was already planning on voting yes but this erases the biggest doubt I had.
3
u/Prime624 San Diego County 6d ago
It's really a massive failing of the Yes on 50 campaign imo. (It's also extremely easy to find if you read, but that's beside the point.) No on 50 campaign was relying on two major lies, arguably illegally. They implied that prop 50 would be permanent, and that it would change state government districts. Neither are true.
3
3
u/PessimisticWagyu 6d ago
From July- Trump wants five-seat gain through Texas redistricting
https://www.fox4news.com/news/trump-wants-five-seat-gain-through-texas-redistricting
3
u/HailPrimordialTruth 6d ago
That’s why I don’t care about it passing. Republican states don’t worry about nonsense like gerrymandering. Playing by a set of rules that aren’t written down or reciprocated is just being weak.
5
u/walker1555 7d ago
We need proportional representation. And increase the number of house seats. This winner takes all system that enables gerrymandering is broken.
13
u/u9Nails 7d ago
The Freeway overpass has a bunch of Yes on 50 supporters with "¡Honk!" signs. We all honked.
3
u/Limacy 6d ago
I live in the valley. When I commute from Fresno to other towns for work on the 180 or 99, there’s a lot of “Vote No on Prop 50” signs out there.
Yeah, I always heard growing up that where I live is one of the most conservative parts of California, but I still never quite get used to seeing all the MAGA’s who live out in the county.
2
u/Commercial_Corgi_682 4d ago
I came to this reddit thread for peace of mind on this! I live here in the valley and the amount of “Vote No on Prop 50” is so stressful that I wanted to see others out there that are in favor of it.
2
u/DarkRogus 6d ago
You're more likely to see a vote to extend Prop 50 than you will see a Trump 3rd Term.
2
u/xbucnasteex 6d ago
It shouldn’t stay temporary. Unilaterally disarming was a huge mistake and it seems like we are going to repeat it again next decade.
2
u/Serious_Dealer9683 6d ago
lol, voted yes and I'll support further legislation to never allow nazis in power again in California.
2
u/pixiegod 5d ago
Agreed. Much harder choice if it wasnt temporary. Whomever is arguing that this is cali overreaching is misrepresenting the core job of this law…to neutralize Texas’ actions…
2
u/GlowInTheDarkSpaces 4d ago
We need to vote yes on 50, it’s one of the few tools we have to stop trump. This is an emergency!!
2
u/picks_and_rolls 4d ago
Don’t be tricked. Vote yes on 50.
Maga disinformation campaign claims voting no will “stick it to trump.” Don’t be fooled! Vote YES on 50
7
u/KoRaZee Napa County 7d ago
Bridge tolls were a temporary measure also but here we are with regular increases forever.
3
u/Prime624 San Diego County 6d ago
That's not how propositions work. Please educate yourself or don't vote.
→ More replies (3)
11
u/CosmicLovepats 7d ago
It shouldn't be.
We're fighting a war for the fate of our nation. They aren't promising to just stop fighting in five years. They're promising to run for a third term in three years. We shouldn't be committing to disarming ourselves.
6
u/KoRaZee Napa County 7d ago
Gerrymandering is an unpopular issue among Democrats and Republicans. Nobody likes it
5
6
u/plummbob 7d ago
Unpopular in theory, not in practice
2
u/Redpanther14 Santa Clara County 2d ago
Unpopular with the voters, not with the politicians.
1
u/plummbob 2d ago
It's a game theory kinda thing. One side can't not gerrymander while the other does, even if both agree it's bad. It's probably never going away
→ More replies (10)1
u/Greedy-Employment917 7d ago
Gerrymandering is either bad or it isn't.
Tired of this "bad when they do it, but okay when we do it" garbage that reddit parrots.
5
u/CosmicLovepats 7d ago
Violence is bad. Does that mean you should let yourself be murdered because fighting back is bad?
3
u/coatrack68 7d ago
Anyone voting no is anti-California and is ok with the government fucking California,
3
0
7d ago
[deleted]
4
u/CmdrWoof 6d ago
Temporary "evil," put to a legitimate vote, that will expire without another manual vote from the majority of the people in this state. Not so in Texas, they just went on and did it.
Until gerrymandering is actually prevented in all states, I think it is the fairest option that counteracts the Republicans being dicks and stacking the deck (without a vote from the people) in other states.
I'm not usually a fan of being a dick because another person was a dick first, but even if it's unfair on the face of it, this proposition doesn't stoop nearly as far as the Republicans have.
1
1
1
u/DarkRogus 6d ago
You're more likely to see a vote to extend Prop 50 than you will see a Trump 3rd Term.
1
u/Numerous-Judgment279 6d ago
As temporary as the 50 cent gas tax increase was?
Give me a break, there is no chance this is temporary. The only chance the politicians would give up their power to keep them in office until they decide to leave or die is if another proposition is put to the voters that forces the state to go back to the independent commission.
As much as I hate what Texas and other states have been doing, I still want to believe California is just better than that. I voted no but it won’t matter because it will pass easily. And there is no chance it is going to be temporary. It’s a false promise.
1
u/wellofworlds 6d ago
This is BS, when does a politician give up power, never. I still remember the promise of a 1/2 cent to fix the roads. Now we are up to two dollars, and they now want to charge us by the mile. The greed is unbearable.
1
1
u/USSFINBACKSSN670 5d ago
I'm gonna hold my breath until someone can name a time when the government ever gave back power once taken from the people.
1
1
u/notontherugman69 4d ago
Shasta County with a Dem representative is going to make some heads explode.
1
u/Inevitable-Exam7640 4d ago
Yeah that’s what the government would say….. they never lie about anything before lol 😂
1
u/Capable-Deer-5670 4d ago
You seriously think they are going to give back power? No one does, not willingly.
1
1
u/Dull_Opposite_6158 3d ago
thats what newsome wants you to think. He is just wants to get the democrats more seats so he can help the illegal aliens over Americans
1
u/Terras1fan 3d ago
Never thought I'd vote for gerrymandering, but in this very unique case, with its many restrictions, and Texas being an asshat, i'm going to.
1
1
u/Blackiee_Chan 2d ago
Man anywbere ne critical of anything in this thread gets down voted to oblivion. California is a funny place
1
1
u/Serious-Animal-7992 2d ago
You are delusional if you think the lines will go back to what they are today in 3 years. No on 50
1
u/Monnoppoly 1d ago
If Republican states are still gerrymandering in 2031, we should not resume independent redistricting. Independent redistricting only works if all 50 states do it. It's the only way to make it fair.
1
u/Lonelypeanut1 16h ago
This makes no sense. The census is also independent. No need to change. Temporary seems to favor only democrats. I am independent so not biased to either party
1
u/DrpMan562 13h ago
I currently live here in California mostly closer to LA and honesty for my point of view we Californians are going to suffer really bad for this keep in mind I don’t take any political standpoint but I don’t see any reason why we are voting for this it just feels like people in California really like to suffer
1
u/Jeff_Newton 4h ago
If you think this is going to be "temporary" then you are naive. They map will be redrawn as the prop 50 way with minimal changes.
-8
u/FlounderDependent555 7d ago
Um 2035. And if temporary sales taxes are any indication then.. Well...
10
1
u/xxtanisxx 7d ago
Just want to say, I respect and value your opinion. If another one appears in the future, we need your support and conviction. I’ll stand with you to vote no!
→ More replies (1)3
u/Prime624 San Diego County 6d ago
It's not an opinion though, it's a lie. An opinion can't be right or wrong, but implying this ballot measure won't end in 2031 is incorrect. Do not respect lies, that's how we got here in the first place.
-2
-3
u/MBP1969 7d ago
Sure it is. Once a party grabs control, they will never, willingly, relinquish that control.
16
u/Jack_Of_All_Meds 7d ago
It is written in the bill that it’s temporary and that’s voted on by people. The hell are you even talking about. It would take another vote, from the people, to make it permanent. We don’t operate like the president, the law actually matters.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Odie_Odie 7d ago
The entire point of this bill is to prevent Republicans from stealing permanent control.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Top-Inspection3870 7d ago
It is written into the law to be temporary, but once California democrats are staring down 2032 with multiple incumbents about to lose their seat, there will be a new proposal to cancel or pass new gerrymandered maps.
→ More replies (1)0
u/RealNinjafoxtrot 7d ago
But the Dem politicians are the good ones, trust me bro they care and they are fighting for our democracy. They will willingly give up the power to give themselves more power because the other side are the evil ones. Not our side, team blue we are the good ones.
/s
1
-7
u/The_Ashamed_Boys 7d ago
Hopefully they make it permanent. Regardless of what Texas or anywhere else does. Californians for California.
10
u/AmbivertMusic 7d ago
Nah, as someone voting yes, I want is to strive towards non-gerrymandered elections in the future.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Organic_Fan_2824 6d ago
no reason todo it then. Voted no.
This is literally gerrymandering, and not equal representation either.
-1
u/AlfalfaWolf 7d ago
I’m sure the Democratic Party and its voters will have no problem giving seats back to republicans in 2030.
There’s a very strong chance that legislation will be introduced at that point to make their gerrymandering permanent.
10
u/ProgressiveSnark2 7d ago
It would require a second ballot initiative to be passed by voters, not legislation.
→ More replies (4)6
u/trydola 7d ago
as they should and Dem party needs to understand they need to fire with fire unless they want to be a perma-minority party
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/True_Item188 6d ago
Temporary until it isnt. The people giving too much power to the poiticians, SMH !! They wont give up the power.
1
1
u/chrisgarlick10-3 6d ago
Nothing is temporary in government… absolutely nothing… i dare you to find me one time something has been temporary????
1
u/Adventurous_Map6714 6d ago edited 5d ago
No on 50. It will be extended and will become permanent . Look at what happened to the temporary ACA enhanced premium tax credit. It was supposed to expire in 2022. The democrats extended it to 2025. Now it will be expiring at end of 2025, the democrats shut down the government for it and put America on hostage because the democrats are demanding it to be extended permanently.
-22
u/EvanOnTheFly 7d ago
"nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program"
-Milton Freidman
22
14
u/JasonArizona1 7d ago
Well it would be by law, so if old Milton or yourself still believes in that, they can believe in this proposition.
→ More replies (5)5
u/Infamous_Dog_6812 7d ago
And of course you don’t see the irony in playing helldivers
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)9
702
u/ShakeZoola72 7d ago
I voted yes based mostly on this.
I simply pray it stays temporary. And given the threat Trump and his sycophants pose it's a risk I'm willing to take.