california voter

Republican infighting crescendoed in the aftermath of California voters overwhelmingly approving Democratic-friendly redistricting plan this week that may undercut the GOP’s control of Congress and derail President Trump’s polarizing agenda.

The state GOP chairwoman was urged to resign and former Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who championed the creation of the state’s independent redistricting commission, was called “cowardly” by one top GOP leader for not being more involved in the campaign.

Leaders of the Republican-backed committees opposing the ballot measure, known as Proposition 50, were questioned about how they spent nearly $58 million in the special election after such a dismal outcome.

Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, the once prodigious Republican fundraiser, reportedly vowed earlier in the campaign that he could raise $100 million for the opposition but ended up delivering a small fraction of that amount.

Assemblyman Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego), a conservative firebrand, called on state GOP chair Corrin Rankin to step down and faulted other Republican leaders and longtime party operatives for the ballot measure’s failure, calling them “derelict of duty and untrustworthy and incompetent.”

“Unless serious changes are made at the party, the midterms are going to be a complete disaster,” DeMaio said, also faulting the other groups opposing the effort. “We need accountability. There needs to be a reckoning because otherwise the lessons won’t be learned. The old guard needs to go. The old guard has failed us too many times. This is the latest failure.”

Rankin pushed back against the criticism, saying the state party was the most active GOP force in the final stretch of the election. Raising $11 million during the final three weeks of the campaign, the party spent it on mailers, digital ads and text messages, as well as organizing phone banks and precinct walking, she said.

Former Speaker of the House and California Republican Kevin McCarthy speaks to the press at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 19, 2023.

(Samuel Corum / AFP via Getty Images)

“We left it all on the field,” Rankin said Wednesday morning at a Sacramento press conference about a federal lawsuit California Republicans filed arguing that Proposition 50 is unconstitutional. “We were the last man standing … to reach out to Republicans and make sure they turned out.”

Responding to criticism that their effort was disorganized, including opposition campaign mailers being sent to voters who had already cast ballots, Rankin said the party would conduct a post-election review of its efforts. But she added that she was extremely proud of the work her team did in the “rushed special election.”

Barring successful legal challenges, the new California congressional districts enacted under Proposition 50 will go into effect before the 2026 election. The new district maps favor Democratic candidates and were crafted to unseat five Republican incumbents, which could erase Republicans’ narrow edge in the the U.S. House of Representatives.

If Democrats win control of the body, Trump policy agenda will likely be stymied and the president and members of his administration cold face multiple congressional investigations.

Gov. Gavin Newsom and other California Democrats proposed Proposition 50 in response to Trump urging elected officials in Texas and other GOP-led states to redraw their congressional districts to increase the number of Republicans elected to the House next year.

The new California congressional boundaries voters approved Tuesday could give Democrats the opportunity to pick up five seats in the state’s 52-member congressional delegation.

Proposition 50 will change how California determines the boundaries of congressional districts. The measure asked voters to approve new congressional district lines designed to favor Democrats for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections, overriding the map drawn by the state’s independent redistricting commission.

Some Republicans lamented that Schwarzenegger was not more involved in the election. The movie star championed the creation of the independent commission in 2010, his final year in office. He campaigned for the creation of similar bodies to fight partisan drawing of district lines across the nation after leaving office.

Shawn Steel, one of California’s three representatives on the Republican National Committee, called Schwarzenegger “a cowardly politician.”

“Arnold decided to sit it out,” Steel said. “Arnold just kind of raised the flag and immediately went under the desk.”

Steel said that the former governor failed to follow through on the messages he repeatedly delivered about the importance of independent redistricting.

“He could have had his name on the ballot as a ballot opponent,” Steel said. “He turned it down. So I’d say, with Arnold, just disappointing, but not surprised. That’s his political legacy.”

Schwarzenegger’s team pushed back at this criticism as misinformed.

“We were clear from the beginning that he was not going to be a part of the campaign and was going to speak his mind,” said Daniel Ketchell, a spokesman for the former governor. “His message was very clear and non-partisan. When one campaign couldn’t even criticize gerrymandering in Texas, it was probably hard for voters to believe they actually cared about fairness.”

Schwarzenegger spoke out against Proposition 50 a handful of times during the election, including at an appearance at USC that was turned into a television ad by one of the anti-Proposition 50 committees that appeared to go dark before election day.

On election day, he emailed followers about gut health, electrolytes, protein bars, fitness and conversations to increase happiness. There was no apparent mention of the Tuesday election.

The Democratic-led California Legislature in August voted to place Proposition 50 on the November ballot, costing nearly $300 million, and setting off a sprint to Tuesday’s special election.

The opponents were vastly outspent by the ballot measure’s supporters, who contributed nearly $136 million to various efforts. That financial advantage, combined with Democrats’ overwhelming edge in voter registration in California, were main contributors to the ballot measure’s success. When introduced in August, Proposition 50 had tepid support and its prospects appeared uncertain.

Nearly 64% of the nearly 8.3 million voters who cast ballots supported Proposition 50, while 36% opposed it as of Wednesday night, according to the California Secretary of State’s office.

In addition to the state Republican Party, two main campaign committees opposed Proposition 50, including the one backed by McCarthy. A separate group was funded by more than $32 million from major GOP donor Charles Munger Jr., the son of a billionaire who was Warren Buffet’s right-hand man, and who bankrolled the creation of the independent congressional redistricting commission in 2010.

Representatives of the two committees, who defended their work Tuesday night after the election was called moments after the polls closed, saying they could not overcome the vast financial disadvantage and that the proposition’s supporters must be held to their promises to voters such as pushing for national redistricting reform, did not respond to repeated requests for comment on Wednesday.

Newsom’s committee supporting Proposition 50 had prominent Democrats stumping for the effort, including former President Obama starring in ads supporting the measure.

That’s in stark contrast to the opposition efforts. Trump was largely absent, possibly because he is deeply unpopular among Californians and the president does not like to be associated with losing causes.

California Republicans in Congress are vastly outnumbered by their Democratic counterparts in the state — and it may get worse.

Five of the nine GOP seats are at risk after California voters passed Proposition 50 in Tuesday’s special election. The measure, put on the ballot by the Democratic-led state Legislature, reshaped California congressional districts in a way that was specifically designed to unseat Republican incumbents.

The new maps target areas held by Reps. Kevin Kiley and Doug LaMalfa in Northern California, Rep. David Valadao in the Central Valley, and Reps. Ken Calvert, Young Kim and Darrell Issa in Southern California. The radical reconfiguration not only put Republicans in danger, but probably protects vulnerable Democratic officeholders by adding more voters from their own party into their reconfigured districts.

Already, California’s Republican members hold just nine seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, while Democrats have 43.

Proposition 50’s passage also sets off an intraparty fight for a newly created Republican seat in Riverside and Orange counties, which will pit two GOP incumbents against one another — Calvert of Corona and Kim of Anaheim Hills — knocking one of them out of office. Calvert and Kim on Wednesday announced they planned to run for that seat.

“With the passage of Prop. 50, Californians were sold a bill of goods, allowing [Gov.] Gavin Newsom and his radical allies in Sacramento an unprecedented power grab to redraw the Congressional map and silence those who disagree with his extreme policies,” Calvert said in a statement.

Newsom and other Democratic leaders argue that redistricting, which normally happens once a decade by an independent commission, was necessary after GOP leaders in Texas redrew their own congressional districts — at the request of President Trump — in a bid to add more seats for their party and retain Republican control of the House.

The passage of Proposition 50 will boost Democratic efforts to win control of the House after the 2026 election, a victory that likely would stifle parts of Trump’s agenda and open the president and his administration to a litany of congressional investigations.

Proposition 50 is expected to exacerbate the political isolation that millions of Republicans in California already feel, especially in the state’s vast northern and inland territories, and conservative suburban enclaves.

Trump won 38% of the presidential vote in California last year. About a quarter of the state’s registered voters are Republicans. Yet, Democrats have held every statewide office since 2011, and have an iron grip on the California congressional delegation.

Some California Republicans may be left asking: “Who in Congress is representing our views and who do we turn to?” said Mark Baldassare, survey director of the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California.

Cook Political Report, which tracks elections, changed 11 California congressional district race ratings Tuesday, with all but one district moving in Democrats’ favor.

Political consultant Rob Stutzman remains skeptical that Democrats will win all five congressional seats targeted by Newsom in the 2026 midterm elections. Some of the GOP representatives have deep roots in the community and have survived past challenges by Democrats, Stutzman said.

Newsom and others “may have overpromised what Prop. 50 could do,” Stutzman said.

Here are the top six Republicans whose districts were changed by Proposition 50 and who may find their political future at risk.

Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale)

In Northern California, LaMalfa appears likely to run in one of two redesigned districts: One that stretches toward Mendocino National Forest and south toward Santa Rosa, or another that runs along the Oregon border and down the coast to the San Francisco Bay Area.

His current district, which spreads across the deeply conservative northeast corner of California to the Sacramento suburbs, was carved up by Proposition 50 and replaced with three districts that favor Democrats.

“They’re not going to kidnap my district here without a battle,” LaMalfa, 65, said Tuesday.

Democrats running for Congressional District 1’s seat — the seat that includes Mendocino National Forest — include Audrey Denney, an education director who unsuccessfully challenged LaMalfa in 2018 and 2020.

Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin)

Kiley’s new district takes in neighborhoods in and around Sacramento, pulling in Democratic voters and losing former Republican communities along the Nevada border.

He hasn’t said which district he’ll seek.

“My current district is split six different ways,” Kiley, 40, said Wednesday. “In that sense, I have a lot of options.”

On Tuesday night, he promised to “work across party lines to find a national solution to the age-old plague of gerrymandering, and in particular, to the more recent affliction of mid-decade gerrymandering.”

Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford)

Valadao’s predominantly Latino district in the Central Valley extends north post-Proposition 50, gaining more registered Democrats.

Still, more Democratic voters doesn’t necessarily translate to a Democratic victory, given the conservative attitudes in the region. A dairy farmer, Valadao, 48, has survived past challenges, in part due to poor turnout among Democrats and his popularity among moderate voters in the Central Valley.

Among those who have announced their intention to challenge Valadao is Visalia school board trustee Randy Villegas, a Democrat.

Valadao was among the few Republicans who voted to impeach President Trump following the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters, increasing his appeal to Democratic voters. But he could also be vulnerable because of his support for Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill,” which cut medical benefits for roughly two-thirds of his constituents. The representative argued his district will get concessions for rural hospitals, water infrastructure and agricultural investments in the legislation.

A Valadao spokesperson didn’t immediately respond for a request for comment Tuesday night.

Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Corona) and Rep. Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills)

Nearly all of Calvert’s district was moved north, and now takes in the Los Angeles County communities of Pomona, Ontario and Fontana.

However, Calvert, 72, announced he would run for the newly formed 40th Congressional District, which includes western Riverside County and eastern Orange County, including his hometown of Corona, as well as Murrieta and Mission Viejo. It’s a strongly Republican district now shared by Republican colleague Kim of Anaheim Hills.

“Californians in the newly drawn 40th District deserve a proven conservative they can trust and a fighter who has delivered results for Riverside and Orange County for decades,” Calvert said in a statement Wednesday. “No one else comes close to my record of service to the new 40th. I’ve lived here my entire life and already represent the majority of this district in Congress.”

Calvert praised Trump’s economic record and efforts to “secure our borders,” a direct appeal to the president’s MAGA base living in the region.

Michael Moodian, public policy researcher at Chapman University, expects Calvert will face a “tough fight” with Kim in the 2026 election.

Calvert is the longest-serving Republican member of California’s congressional delegation and is well known among voters in the area, while Kim is a strong fundraiser and has a moderate tone given that her current district is politically divided, Moodian said.

Kim, 63, one of the first Korean American women elected to Congress, last year won a third term.

Kim on Wednesday boasted that she was one of the most prominent Republican fundraisers in Congress and had a proven record of winning tough races.

“I’m running because California needs proven fighters who will stand with President Trump to advance a bold America First agenda that restores law and order in our communities, strengthens our national security, and protects the American Dream for future generations,” Kim said in a statement.

Calvert has survived previous redistricting rounds, including in 2021, when the overwhelmingly liberal Palm Springs — the first city in the nation to elect an all-LGBTQ+ city council — was added to his district and the Republican-heavy Temecula was taken out.

In 2024, Calvert fended off former federal prosecutor Will Rollins, besting the young Democrat 51.7% to 48.3%.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Bonsall)

Post-Proposition 50, Issa’s Republican stronghold in Southern California becomes more narrowly divided among Democrats and Republicans and gets a larger share of Latino voters. Like Calvert and Kim, Issa may decide to run in the new Republican-majority seat in Riverside and Orange counties.

“California is my home,” Issa said Tuesday night. “And it’s worth fighting for,”

He called Proposition 50 “the worst gerrymander in history” and vowed to continue to represent “the people of California — regardless of their party or where they live.”

Issa, 72, lost a legal challenge last week over the new maps, which he sought to block.

According to the complaint filed in federal court, Issa claimed he would be harmed because he would lose “seniority advantages in committee proceedings” and have “reduced influence over legislative priorities and committee work affecting my constituents,” NBC7 in San Diego reported.

Democratic San Diego City Councilmember Marni von Wilpert and perennial candidate Ammar Campa-Najjar are among those challenging Issa in his new seat.

California voters went to the polls Tuesday to decide on a radical redistricting plan with national implications, but the campaign is shaping up to be a referendum on President Trump.

Proposition 50, a ballot measure about redrawing the state’s congressional districts, was crafted by Democrats in response to Trump urging Texas and other GOP-majority states to modify their congressional maps to favor Republicans, a move that was designed to maintain Republican control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Opponents have said Proposition 50 is a power grab by Democrats that would blatantly disenfranchise Republican voters.

But supporters, fueled by a huge war chest in deep blue California, managed to make the vote about Trump and what they say are his efforts to erode democracy. The president has never been popular in California, but unprecedented months of immigration raids, tariffs and environmental rollbacks have only heightened the conflict.

“Trump is such a polarizing figure,” said Rick Hasen, a professor of law and political science at UCLA. “He commands great loyalty from one group of people and great animosity from others. … It’s not surprising that this measure has been portrayed as sticking it to Donald Trump or [California Gov.] Gavin Newsom.”

Proposition 50 underscores how hyperpartisan California politics have become. A UC Berkeley poll last week conducted in conjunction with The Times found more than 9 out of 10 Democrats supported Proposition 50 and a similar proportion of Republicans opposed it.

California voters had been bombarded with television ads, mailers and social media posts for weeks about the high-stakes special election, so much so that only 2% of likely voters were undecided, according to the poll.

As if on cue, Trump weighed in on Proposition 50 on Tuesday morning just as voting was getting underway.

“The Unconstitutional Redistricting Vote in California is a GIANT SCAM in that the entire process, in particular the Voting itself, is RIGGED,” Trump said on Truth Social just minutes after polling stations opened across California.

The president provided no evidence for his allegations.

Newsom dismissed the president’s claims on X as “the ramblings of an old man that knows he’s about to LOSE.”

At a White House briefing Tuesday afternoon, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed, without providing examples, that California was receiving ballots in the name of undocumented immigrants who could not legally vote.

California’s top elections official, Secretary of State Shirley Weber, called Trump’s allegation “another baseless claim.”

“The bottom line is California elections have been validated by the courts,” Weber said in a statement. “California voters will not be deceived by someone who consistently makes desperate, unsubstantiated attempts to dissuade Americans from participating in our democracy.”

More than 6.3 million Californians — 28% of the state’s 23 million registered voters — had cast ballots as of Monday, according to a voting tracker run by Democratic redistricting expert Paul Mitchell. Ballots submitted by Democrats were outpacing votes by Republicans on Monday, though GOP voters were believed to be more likely to vote in person on election day.

Disabled Army veteran Micah Corpe, 50, had some choice words for Newsom outside a Twentynine Palms church that served as a polling place, calling the politician a “greasy used car salesman.”

Corpe, a Republican, described Proposition 50 as an effort by the governor to “do whatever he wants because he doesn’t like Trump.” At the same time, he said Texas’ decision to redraw its congressional districts was a necessity because of the influx of people moving there from California and other blue states.

“He fights [Trump] on everything,” Corpe said of Newsom. “Just give in a little to get a little. That’s all he’s got to do.”

Matt Lesenyie, an assistant professor of political science at Cal State Long Beach, said the seeds of Proposition 50 were sowed when it became clear that Republicans in Congress were not going to challenge Trump in an investigatory way or provide serious oversight.

“One of the benefits of our system is that there are checks designed in there and we haven’t exercised those checks in a good long time, so I think this is a Hail Mary for potentially doing that,” he said.

Bob Rowell, 72, said that in an ideal world Proposition 50 wouldn’t be necessary. But the Trump administration’s push to redraw lines in red states has created a “distinct danger of creating a never-ending Republican domination in Congress,” he said. So Rowell, a Green Party member, voted yes.

“I hope there’s some way to bring us back into balance,” he said.

Robert Hamilton, 35, an architectural drafter who lives in Twentynine Palms, sees Proposition 50 as a necessary step to push back on Trump’s policies, which he said are impinging on people’s rights. He’s proud of the role California is playing in this political moment.

“I think as a state we’re doing an excellent job of trying to push back against some of the more egregious oversteps of our liberties,” Hamilton said outside a church where he’d just cast his ballot in favor of the measure. “I do hope that if this measure is successful that other states will follow suit — not necessarily taking the same steps to redistrict but finding ways to at least hold the line while hopefully we get things sorted out.”

Times staff writers Seema Mehta and Katie King contributed to this report.

As California voters went to the polls Tuesday to cast their ballot on a measure that could block President Trump’s national agenda, state officials ridiculed his unsubstantiated claims that voting in the largely Democratic state is “rigged.”

“The Unconstitutional Redistricting Vote in California is a GIANT SCAM in that the entire process, in particular the Voting itself, is RIGGED,” Trump said on Truth Social just minutes after polling stations opened Tuesday across California.

The president provided no evidence for his allegations.

“All ‘Mail-In’ Ballots, where the Republicans in that State are ‘Shut Out,’ is under very serious legal and criminal review,” the GOP president wrote. “STAY TUNED!”

Gov. Gavin Newsom dismissed the president’s claims on X as “the ramblings of an old man that knows he’s about to LOSE.”

His press office chimed in, too, calling Trump “a totally unserious person spreading false information in a desperate attempt to cope with his failures.”

At a White House briefing Tuesday afternoon, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed, without providing examples, that California was receiving ballots in the name of undocumented immigrants who could not legally vote.

“They have a universal mail-in voting system, which we know is ripe for fraud,” Leavitt told reporters. “Fraudulent ballots that are being mailed in in the names of other people, in the names of illegal aliens who shouldn’t be voting in American elections. There’s countless examples and we’d be happy to provide them.”

The White House did not immediately respond to requests for more details.

Political tension across the nation is high as California voters cast ballots on Proposition 50, a plan championed by Newsom to redraw the state’s congressional districts ahead of the 2026 election to favor the Democratic Party. The measure is intended to offset GOP gerrymandering in red states after Trump pressed Texas to rejigger maps to shore up the GOP’s narrow House majority.

California’s top elections official, Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber, called Trump’s allegation “another baseless claim.”

“The bottom line is California elections have been validated by the courts,” Weber said in a statement. “California voters will not be deceived by someone who consistently makes desperate, unsubstantiated attempts to dissuade Americans from participating in our democracy.”

Weber noted that more than 7 million Californians have already voted and encouraged those who had yet to cast ballots to go to the polls.

“California voters will not be sidelined from exercising their constitutional right to vote and should not let anyone deter them from exercising that right,” Weber said.

Of the 7 million Californians who have voted, more than 4.6 million have done so by mail, according to the secretary of state’s office. Los Angeles residents alone have cast more than 788,000 mail-in ballots.

Leavitt told D.C. reporters Tuesday that the White House is working on an executive order to combat so-called “blatant” election fraud.

“The White House is working on an executive order to strengthen our election in this country,” Leavitt said, “and to ensure that there cannot be blatant fraud, as we’ve seen in California with their universal mail-in voting system.”

Trump has long criticized mail-in voting. As more Democrats opted to vote by mail in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, the president repeatedly made unproven claims linking mail in voting with voter fraud. When Trump ultimately lost that election, he blamed expanded mail-in voting.

In March, Trump signed an executive order requiring that Attorney General Pam Bondi “take all necessary action” against states that count absentee or mail-in ballots received after Election Day. Most states count mail-in or absentee ballots as long as they are postmarked by Election Day.

Over the last month, the stakes in the California special election have ratcheted up as polls indicate Proposition 50 could pass. More than half of likely California voters said they planned to support the measure, which could allow Democrats to gain up to five House seats.

Last month, the Justice Department appeared to single out California for particular national scrutiny: It announced it would send federal monitors to polling locations in counties in California as well as New Jersey, another traditionally Democratic state that is conducting nationally significant off-year elections.

The monitors, it said, would be sent to five California counties: Los Angeles, Kern, Riverside, Fresno and Orange.

While Trump is often a flame-thrower on social media, he has largely been silent on Proposition 50, aside from a few Truth Social posts.

In late October, the president voiced skepticism with California’s mail-in ballots and early voting — directly contradicting efforts by the state’s GOP leaders to get people to vote.

“No mail-in or ‘Early’ Voting, Yes to Voter ID! Watch how totally dishonest the California Prop Vote is! Millions of Ballots being ‘shipped,’” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “GET SMART REPUBLICANS, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!!!”

Over the weekend, Trump posted a video purporting to show a member of the San Joaquin County’s Sheriff Dept. questioning election integrity in California.

Times Staff Writer Seema Mehta contributed to this report

President Trump urged California voters on Sunday not to cast mail-in ballots or vote early in the California election about redistricting — the direct opposite of the message from state GOP leaders.

Repeating his false claim that former President Biden beat him in 2020 because the election was rigged, Trump argued that the November special election about redistricting in California would be rigged, as would the 2026 midterm election to determine control of Congress.

“No mail-in or ‘Early’ Voting, Yes to Voter ID! Watch how totally dishonest the California Prop Vote is! Millions of Ballots being ‘shipped,’” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “GET SMART REPUBLICANS, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!!!”

Proposition 50, a ballot measure proposed by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other California Democrats to redraw the state’s congressional districts to boost their party’s ranks in the U.S. House of Representatives, is on the Nov. 4 ballot.

The rare mid-decade redistricting effort was in response to Trump urging GOP-led states, initially Texas, to increase the number of Republicans in the House in the 2026 midterm election to allow him to continue implementing his agenda in his final two years in the White House.

Newsom responded to Trump on X: “Ramblings of an old man that knows he’s going to LOSE.”

Trump has not weighed in on the merits of Proposition 50, while prominent Democrats who support it have, including former President Obama.

More than 4 million mail-in ballots — 18% of the ballots sent to California’s 23 million voters — had been returned as of Friday, according to a vote tracker run by Democratic redistricting expert Paul Mitchell, who drew the proposed maps on the ballot. Democrats continue to outpace Republicans in returning ballots, 51% to 28%. Voters registered without a party preference or with other political parties have returned 21% of the ballots.

Early-voting centers also opened in 29 counties on Saturday.

Turnout figures were alarming Republicans leaders before Trump’s message.

“It’s simple. Republicans need to stop complaining and vote. We ask and ask and ask and yet turnout still lags,” the San Diego GOP posted on X. “To win this one GOP turnout needs to be materially better than average. It’s very doable but won’t just happen. Work it.”

Republicans historically voted early while Democrats were more likely to cast ballots on election day. Trump upended this dynamic, creating dissonance with GOP leaders across the nation who recognized the value of banking early votes. And it completely contradicts the messaging by the opponents of Proposition 50.

Jessica Millan Patterson, a former chair of the state GOP and leader of the “No on Prop. 50 — Stop Sacramento’s Power Grab” committee, has been a longtime proponent of urging Republican voters to cast ballots as early and conveniently as possible.

“Sacramento politicians rushed this costly election for partisan gain, and mistakes have been made,” she said Sunday evening. “If Californians want change from our state’s failed one-party rule, it starts by turning out to vote no on Proposition 50.”

Backed by a hefty list of prominent endorsers, Los Angeles County Supervisor Hilda Solis has officially kicked off her bid for a southeast L.A. County congressional seat, should new district maps be approved by California voters in November.

“I’ve been standing up for the people — and against Trump — as a Supervisor, and now it’s time to campaign for the House and fight for the people and democracy in the Congress,” Solis said in a statement Friday.

The former secretary of Labor, 67, previously served in Congress and the statehouse before becoming a county supervisor.

Solis’ campaign launch included endorsements from five sitting members of Congress, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and civil rights leader Dolores Huerta, among others.

The heavyweight list speaks to the legislator’s deep backing in local Democratic politics. It also doubles as a warning to other potential candidates about the establishment firepower behind Solis’ nascent campaign, despite the seat she’s angling for not actually existing yet.

Solis would run in the redrawn 38th District, which is currently represented by Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-Whittier). Should the maps pass, Sánchez is likely planning to run in the redrawn 41st District, which will include her home of Whittier, leaving the new 38th District without an incumbent candidate. Both districts will be heavily Democratic.

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s push to redraw California’s district maps to favor Democrats will be decided by voters in a Nov. 4 special election — a decision that could potentially determine the balance of power in the Congress in 2026. The plan punches back at President Trump’s drive for more GOP House seats in Texas and other states.

The Times reported this month that Solis was lining up support for a potential candidacy even before the new maps were finalized. At least one California lawmaker told The Times that Solis referred to the district as “my seat” when asking for backing — a reference to the seat she once held, even though the new district doesn’t yet exist. Solis confirmed her candidacy to the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on Thursday.

Along with Sanchez, former Obama administration staffer TJ Adams-Falconer has also filed campaign fundraising paperwork in the district.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris’ decision to forgo a run for California governor has created a wide-open race in next year’s election to run the nation’s most populous state, according to a poll released Tuesday by UC Berkeley and the Los Angeles Times.

Nearly 4 in 10 registered voters surveyed said they are uncertain about whom they will support in the 2026 contest to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom.

“It’s very unsettled. Most of the voters, the plurality in this poll, are undecided,” said Mark DiCamillo, director of the poll, which was conducted by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times. “They don’t really know much about the candidates.”

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Among those who had a preference, former Democratic Rep. Katie Porter of Irvine had a small edge as the top choice, with the backing of 17%. Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican, was the only other candidate who received double-digit support, winning the backing of 10% of respondents.

DiCamillo said Porter’s unsuccessful 2024 U.S. Senate campaign boosted her recognition among California voters, but cautioned that she had a small, early lead more than nine months before the June 2 primary. Bianco’s support was driven by voters focused on crime and public safety, taxes and the budget deficit, perennial concerns among GOP voters, according to the survey.

Other top candidates for governor — former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, former state legislative leader Toni Atkins, current California Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, former state Controller Betty Yee, wealthy businessman Stephen Cloobeck and conservative commentator Steve Hilton — received single-digit support as voters’ first choice in the poll. A few potential candidates also had single-digit support, including billionaire Los Angeles businessman Rick Caruso, former Trump administration official Ric Grenell and former GOP state Sen. Brian Dahle.

The survey is among the first independent public polls since Harris announced in late July that she would not run for governor in 2026, dramatically reshuffling the calculus in a crowded race that the former vice president was widely expected to dominate if she mounted a campaign. The poll also took place after Lt. Gov Eleni Kounalakis dropped out of the contest this month to run for state treasurer instead.

“It’s pretty wide-open,” DiCamillo said. “And when you look at the second-choice preference, first and second together, it’s bunched together.”

When voters were asked to rank their top two choices, Porter received 22% as the first or second choice, Becerra got 18%, Bianco notched 15% and Hilton won 12%, according to the poll.

None of the politicians running are well known by Californians compared with the state’s last three governors: Newsom, the former mayor of San Francisco and lieutenant governor, who during his two terms as governor has positioned himself as a foil to President Trump ; former two-term Gov. Jerry Brown, who along with his father left an indelible imprimatur on California’s history; and former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a global celebrity who returned to the Hollywood limelight after he left office, along with launching efforts to fight climate change and support independent redistricting nationwide.

A pressing question is whether anyone else enters the race, notably Caruso, who has the ability to self-fund a campaign. The deadline to file to run for the seat is March 6.

Whoever is elected as California’s next governor will face the difficult task of contending with a hostile Trump administration and an electorate looking to the state’s next leader to address its most pressing concerns.

Economic issues are top of mind among all registered voters, with 36% saying the cost of living is their greatest concern and 25% focusing on the affordability of housing, according to the poll. But there were sharp partisan disparities about other issues. Democrats were more concerned about the state of democracy, climate change and healthcare, while Republicans prioritized crime, taxes and immigration.

Two of California’s most prominent Democrats, Newsom and Harris, are longtime friends grounded in their Bay Area roots and both viewed as potential 2028 presidential candidates.

As a potential White House hopeful, Newsom has an edge over Harris among Californians overall as well as the state’s Democrats, according to the poll.

Roughly 45% of the state’s registered voters said they were very or somewhat enthusiastic about Newsom running, compared with 36% who expressed a similar sentiment about Harris. Additionally, nearly two-thirds of registered voters and 51% of Democrats said Harris should not run for president again after two unsuccessful White House bids — in the primary in 2020 and in the general election in 2024.

“She lost, which is always a negative when you’re trying to run again,” DiCamillo said. “It’s interesting that even after Harris bowed out of the governor’s race, most Californians don’t really think she should run for president.”

While he described Newsom’s support as a “mixed bag” among the state’s registered voters, DiCamillo pointed to his strength among Democrats. Nearly 7 of 10 registered Democratic voters in the state said they are very or somewhat enthusiastic about Newsom running for president, compared with 54% who expressed similar feelings about Harris.

The poll took place during a tumultuous period as Trump’s far-right policies begin to hit their stride.

Drastic cuts to healthcare, nutrition, reproductive rights and other federal safety-net programs are expected to disproportionately affect Californians. The Trump administration‘s aggressive immigration raids in Los Angeles and across the state and country have caused the nation’s partisan divide to widen, driven by the president’s decision to deploy the military and target all undocumented immigrants, including law-abiding workers. Higher-education institutions across the nation have been targeted by the Trump administration, including UCLA, which is being threatened with a $1-billion fine.

Californians were surveyed shortly before Democratic state lawmakers, trying to fight the Trump administration’s agenda, voted Thursday to call a special election in November to redraw the state’s congressional districts. The action was taken to counter gerrymandering efforts in Texas and other GOP-led states as both parties fight for control of Congress in next year’s midterm elections.

The Berkeley IGS poll surveyed 4,950 California registered voters online in English and Spanish from Aug. 11 to 17. The results are estimated to have a margin of error of 2 percentage points in either direction in the overall sample, and larger numbers for subgroups.

SACRAMENTO — Moments after California lawmakers passed a plan designed to undercut attempts by the president and fellow Republicans to keep control of Congress, Gov. Gavin Newsom said the state’s proposed partisan redistricting that favors Democrats is a necessary counterweight to President Trump’s threat to American democracy.

Trump’s assault on vote by mail and decision to send the military into U.S. cities are evidence of his authoritarian policies, and California must do its part to keep him in check, Newsom said.

By deploying federal immigration agents in roving street raids and activating thousands of members of the National Guard in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., Newsom said, Trump is amassing “a private army for Donald Trump.”

“He’s trying to rig the election, he’s trying to set up the conditions where he can claim that the elections were not won fair and square,” Newsom said. “Open your eyes to what is going on in the United States of America in 2025.”

The argument is a preview of the messaging for the ballot measure campaign that Newsom and his Democratic Party allies will be running over the next 74 days.

On Thursday, California lawmakers signed off on a Nov. 4 special election that will put partisan redistricting in front of California voters.

The ballot measure, called Proposition 50, will ask voters to discard the congressional boundaries drawn by the state’s independent redistricting commission in 2021 in favor of partisan districts that could boot as many as five California Republicans out of Congress.

“When all things are equal, and we’re all playing by the same set of rules,” Newsom said, “there’s no question that the Republican Party will be the minority party in the House of Representatives next year.”

California is “responding to what occurred in Texas, we’re neutralizing what occurred, and we’re giving the American people a fair chance,” Newsom said.

National Republican Congressional Committee Chair Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina accused Newsom of trying to “rig” the system to advance his own political career.

“Instead of fixing the homelessness, crime, drug, and cost crises crushing the Golden State, Gavin Newsom is tearing up California’s Constitution to advance his presidential ambitions,” Hudson said in a statement.

California’s new lines would neutralize efforts in Texas to redraw their congressional district maps to help elect five more GOP candidates in 2026. The Texas Legislature is expected to approve new district lines this week.

The other option, Newsom said, is for California and Democrats to “roll over and do nothing.”

“I think people all across the country are going to campaign here in California for this,” Newsom said. “They recognize what’s at stake. It’s not just about the state of California. It’s about the United States of America. It’s about rigging the election. It’s about completely gutting the rules.”

Times staff writer Seema Mehta contributed to this report.

SACRAMENTO — Ratcheting up the pressure in the escalating national fight over control of Congress, the California Legislature on Thursday approved November special election to ask voters in November to redraw the state’s electoral lines to favor Democrats and thwart President Trump’s far-right policy agenda.

The ballot measure, pushed by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state and national Democratic leaders, is the latest volley in a national political brawl over electoral maps that could alter the outcome of the 2026 midterm elections and the balance of power in the U.S. House of Representatives.

If voters approve the redrawn lines on Nov. 4, Democrats in the Golden State would see the odds tilted further in their favor, while the number of California Republicans in the House could be halved.

Newsom initially said that new electoral districts in California would only take effect if another state redrew its lines before 2031. But after Texas moved toward approving its own maps this week that could give the GOP five more House seats, Democrats stripped the so-called “trigger” language from the amendment — meaning that if voters approve the measure, the new lines would take effect no matter what.

The ballot measure language, which asks California voters to override the power of the independent redistricting commission, was approved by most Democrats in the Assembly and the Senate, where they hold supermajorities.

California lawmakers have the power to place constitutional amendments on the statewide ballot without the approval of the governor. Newsom, however, is expected later Thursday to sign two separate bills that fund the special election and spell out the lines for the new congressional districts.

Democrats’ rush to the ballot marks a sudden departure from California’s 15-year commitment to independent redistricting, often held up as the country’s gold standard. The state’s voters stripped lawmakers of the power to draw lines during the Great Recession and handed that partisan power to a panel of independent citizens whose names are drawn in a lottery.

The change, Democrats said, was forced by an extraordinary change in circumstances: After decades of the United States redrawing congressional lines once a decade, President Trump and his political team have leaned on Republican-led states to redraw their district lines before the 2026 midterm elections to help Republicans retain control of the House.

“His playbook is a simple one: Bully, threaten, fight, then rig the rules to hang onto power,” said Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas. “We are here today because California will not be a bystander to that power grab. We are not intimidated, and we are acting openly, lawfully, with purpose and resolve, to defend our state and to defend our democracy.”

Republicans in the state Assembly and the state Senate criticized Newsom’s argument that Democrats must “fight fire with fire,” saying retaliation is a slippery slope that would erode the independent redistricting process California voters have chosen twice at the ballot box.

“You move forward fighting fire with fire, and what happens? You burn it all down,” said Assembly Minority Leader James Gallagher (R-Yuba City). He said Trump was “wrong” to push Gov. Greg Abbott to redraw Texas’ lines to benefit Republicans, and so was California’s push to pursue the same strategy.

Democratic Assembly member Marc Berman speaks during a meeting of the California State Assembly at the California State Capitol on August 21, 2025 in Sacramento.

(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

State Senate Majority Leader Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach), who co-authored the bill drawing the proposed congressional districts, said Democrats had no choice but to stand up, given the harm the Trump administration has inflicted on healthcare, education, tariffs and other policies that affect Californians.

“What do we do? Just sit back and do nothing?” Gonzalez said. “Or do we fight back and provide some chance for our Californians to see themselves in this democracy?”

Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones (R-Santee) said the effort is “a corrupt redistricting scheme to rig California’s elections” that violates the “letter and the spirit of the California constitution.”

“Democrats are rushing this through under the guise of urgency,” Jones said. “There is no emergency that justifies this abuse of process.”

Three Assembly Democrats did not vote in favor of the constitutional amendment. Jasmeet Bains (D-Delano), who is running for Congress against Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford) in the San Joaquin Valley, voted no. Progressive Caucus chair Alex Lee (D-San Jose), and Dawn Addis (D-Morro Bay), did not vote.

Democrats will face an unusual messaging challenge with the November ballot measure, said Matt Lesenyie, an assistant professor of political science at Cal State Long Beach.

The opponents of mid-decade redistricting are stressing that the measure would “disadvantage voters,” he said, which is “wording that Democrats have primed Democrats on, for now two administrations, that democracy is being killed with a thousand cuts.”

“It’s a weird, sort of up-is-down moment,” Lesenyie said.

How did we get here?

Trump’s political team began pressuring Abbott and Texas Republicans in early June to redraw the state’s 38 congressional districts in the middle of the decade — which is very uncommon — to give Republicans a better shot at keeping the House in 2026.

“We are entitled to five more seats,” Trump later told CNBC.

Some Texas Republicans feared that mid-decade redistricting could imperil their own chances of reelection. But within a month of the White House floating the idea, Abbott added the new congressional lines, which would stack the deck against as many as five Texas Democrats in Congress, to the Legislature’s special session in July.

By mid-July, Newsom was talking about California punching back. In an interview with the progressive news site the TN Holler, Newsom said: “These guys, they’re not f—ing around. They’re playing by a totally different set of rules.”

Democrats in Texas fled the state for nearly two weeks, including some to California, to deny Republicans the quorum they needed to pass the new lines. Abbott signed civil arrest warrants and levied fines on the 52 absent Democrats while they held news conferences in California and Illinois to bring attention to the fight.

While the Texas drama unfolded, consultants for the campaign arm of House Democrats in California quietly drew up maps that would further chop down the number of Golden State Republicans in Congress. The proposed changes would eliminate the district of Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Corona) and dilute the number of GOP voters in four districts represented by Reps. Doug LaMalfa, Kevin Kiley, David Valadao and Darrell Issa.

The Democrats agreed to return to Texas last week and pointed to California’s tit-for-tat effort as one measure of success, saying the Golden State could neutralize any Republican gains in Texas.

Since then, other Republican-led states have begun to contemplate redistricting too, including Indiana, Florida and Missouri. Trump’s political allies are publicly threatening to mount primary challenges against any Indiana Republican who opposes redrawing the lines.

In California, the opposition is shaping up as quickly as the ballot measure.

California voters received the first campaign mailer opposing the ballot measure a day before the Legislature voted to approve it. A four-page glossy flier, funded by conservative donor and redistricting champion Charlie Munger Jr., warned voters that mid-decade redistricting is “weakening our Democratic process” and “a threat to California’s landmark election reform.”

Republicans have also gone to court to try and stop the measure, alleging in an emergency petition with the state Supreme Court that Democrats violated the state Constitution by ramming the bills through without following proper legislative procedure. The high court Wednesday rejected the petition.

A wave of legal challenges are expected, not only in California but in any state that reconfigures congressional districts in the expanding partisan brawl.

Assemblymember Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego) said Thursday morning that a lawsuit challenging the California ballot measure would be filed in state court by Friday evening. He said Republicans also plan to litigate the title of the ballot measure and any voter guide materials that accompany it.

And, he said, if voters approve the new lines, “I believe we will have ample opportunity to set the maps aside in federal court.”

Deep in the badlands of defeat, Democrats have soul-searched about what went wrong last November, tinkered with a thousand-plus thinkpieces and desperately cast for a strategy to reboot their stalled-out party.

Amid the noise, California Gov. Gavin Newsom has recently championed an unlikely game plan: Forget the high road, fight fire with fire and embrace the very tactics that virtue-minded Democrats have long decried.

Could the dark art of political gerrymandering be the thing that saves democracy from Trump’s increasingly authoritarian impulses? That’s essentially the pitch Newsom is making to California voters with his audacious new special election campaign.

As Texas Democrats dig in to block a Republican-led redistricting push and Trump muscles to consolidate power wherever he can, Newsom wants to redraw California’s own congressional districts to favor Democrats.

His goal: counter Trump’s drive for more GOP House seats with a power play of his own.

It’s a boundary-pushing gamble that will undoubtedly supercharge Newsom’s political star in the short-term. The long-game glory could be even grander, but only if he pulls it off. A ballot-box flop would be brutal for both Newsom and his party.

The charismatic California governor is termed out of office in 2026 and has made no secret of his 2028 presidential ambitions.

But the distinct scent of his home state will be hard to completely slough off in parts of the country where California is synonymous with loony lefties, business-killing regulation and an out-of-control homelessness crisis. To say nothing of Newsom’s ill-fated dinner at an elite Napa restaurant in violation of COVID-19 protocols — a misstep that energized a failed recall attempt and still haunts the governor’s national reputation.

The redistricting gambit is the kind of big play that could redefine how voters across the country see Newsom.

The strategy could be a boon for Newsom’s 2028 ambitions during a moment when Democrats are hungry for leaders, said Democratic strategist Steven Maviglio. But it’s also a massive roll of the dice for both Newsom and the state he leads.

“It’s great politics for him if this passes,” Maviglio said. “If it fails, he’s dead in the water.”

The path forward — which could determine control of Congress in 2026 — is hardly a straight shot.

The “Election Rigging Response Act,” as Newsom has named his ballot measure, would temporarily scrap the congressional districts enacted by the state’s voter-approved independent redistricting commission.

Under the proposal, Democrats could pick up five seats currently held by Republicans while bolstering vulnerable Democratic incumbent Reps. Adam Gray, Josh Harder, George Whitesides, Derek Tran and Dave Min, which would save the party millions of dollars in costly reelection fights.

But first the Democratic-led state Legislature must vote to place the measure on the Nov. 4 ballot and then it must be approved by voters.

If passed, the initiative would have a “trigger,” meaning the redrawn map would not take effect unless Texas or another GOP-led state moved forward with its own gerrymandering effort.

“I think what Governor Newsom and other Democrats are doing here is exactly the right thing we need to do,” Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin said Thursday.

“We’re not bringing a pencil to a knife fight. We’re going to bring a bazooka to a knife fight, right? This is not your grandfather’s Democratic Party,” Martin said, adding that they shouldn’t be the only ones playing by a set of rules that no longer exist.

For Democrats like Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Glendale), who appeared alongside Newsom to kick off the effort, there is “some heartbreak” to temporarily shelving their commitment to independent redistricting. But she and others were clear-eyed about the need to stop a president “willing to rig the election midstream,” she said.

Friedman said she was hearing overwhelmingly positive reactions to the proposal from all kinds of Democratic groups on the ground.

“The response that I get is, ‘Finally, we’re fighting. We have a way to fight back that’s tangible,’” Friedman recounted.

Still, despite the state’s Democratic voter registration advantage, victory for the ballot measure will hardly be assured. California voters have twice rallied for independent redistricting at the ballot box in the last two decades and many may struggle to abandon those beliefs.

A POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab poll found that voters prefer keeping an independent panel in place to draw district lines by a nearly two-to-one margin, and that independent redistricting is broadly popular in the state.

(Newsom’s press office argued that the poll was poorly worded, since it asked about getting rid of the independent commission altogether and permanently returning line-drawing power to the legislators, rather than just temporarily scrapping their work for several cycles until the independent commission next draws new lines.)

California voters should not expect to see a special election campaign focused on the minutia of reconfiguring the state’s congressional districts, however.

While many opponents will likely attack the change as undercutting the will of California voters, who overwhelmingly supported weeding politics out of the redistricting process, bank on Newsom casting the campaign as a referendum on Trump and his devious effort to keep Republicans in control of Congress.

Newsom employed a similar strategy when he demolished the Republican-led recall campaign against him in 2021, which the governor portrayed as a “life and death” battle against “Trumpism” and far-right anti-vaccine and antiabortion activists. Among California’s Democratic-heavy electorate, that message proved to be extremely effective.

“Wake up, America,” Newsom said Thursday at a Los Angeles rally launching the campaign for the redistricting measure. “Wake up to what Donald Trump is doing. Wake up to his assault. Wake up to the assault on institutions and knowledge and history. Wake up to his war on science, public health, his war against the American people.”

Kevin Liao, a Democratic strategist who has worked on national and statewide campaigns, said his D.C. and California-based political group chats had been blowing up in recent days with texts about the moment Newsom was creating for himself.

Much of Liao’s group chat fodder has involved the output of Newsom’s digital team, which has elevated trolling to an art form on its official @GovPressOffice account on the social media site X.

The missives have largely mimicked the president’s own social media patois, with hyperbole, petty insults and a heavy reliance on the “caps lock” key.

“DONALD IS FINISHED — HE IS NO LONGER ‘HOT.’ FIRST THE HANDS (SO TINY) AND NOW ME — GAVIN C. NEWSOM — HAVE TAKEN AWAY HIS ‘STEP,’ ” one of the posts read last week, dutifully reposted by the governor himself.

Some messages have also ended with Newsom’s initials (a riff on Trump’s signature “DJT” signoff) and sprinkled in key Trumpian callbacks, like the phrase “Liberation Day,” or a doctored Time Magazine cover with Newsom’s smiling mien. The account has garnered 150,000 new followers since the beginning of the month.

Shortly after Trump took office in January, Newsom walked a fine line between criticizing the president and his policies and being more diplomatic, especially after the California wildfires — in hopes of appealing to any semblance of compassion and presidential responsibility Trump possessed.

Newsom had spent the first months of the new administration trying to reshape the California-vs.-Trump narrative that dominated the president’s first term and move away from his party’s prior “resistance” brand.

Those conciliatory overtures coincided with Newsom’s embrace of a more ecumenical posture, hosting MAGA leaders on his podcast and taking a position on transgender athletes’ participation in women’s sports that contradicted the Democratic orthodoxy.

Newsom insisted that he engaged in those conversations to better understand political views that diverged from his own, especially after Trump’s victory in November. However, there was the unmistakable whiff of an ambitious politician trying to broaden his national appeal by inching away from his reputation as a West Coast liberal.

Newsom’s reluctance to readopt the Trump resistance mantle ended after the president sent California National Guard troops into Los Angeles amid immigration sweeps and ensuing protests in June. Those actions revealed Trump’s unchecked vindictiveness and abject lack of morals and honor, Newsom said.

Of late, Newsom has defended the juvenile tone of his press aides’ posts mocking Trump’s own all-caps screeds, and questioned why critics would excoriate his parody and not the president’s own unhinged social media utterances.

“If you’ve got issues with what I’m putting out, you sure as hell should have concerns about what he’s putting out as president,” Newsom said last week. “So to the extent it’s gotten some attention, I’m pleased.”

In an attention-deficit economy where standing out is half the battle, the posts sparkle with unapologetic swagger. And they make clear that Newsom is in on the joke.

“To a certain set of folks who operated under the old rules, this could be seen as, ‘Wow, this is really outlandish.’ But I think they are making the calculation that Democrats want folks that are going to play under this new set of rules that Trump has established,” Liao said.

At a moment when the Democratic party is still occupied with post-defeat recriminations and what’s-next vision boarding, Newsom has emerged from the bog with something resembling a plan.

And he’s betting the house on his deep-blue state’s willingness to fight fire with fire.

Times staff writers Seema Mehta and Laura Nelson contributed to this report.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, Democratic lawmakers and their allies on Thursday launched a special-election campaign to ask California voters to approve new congressional districts to decrease the size of the state’s Republican delegation — a move that could determine control of Congress next year and stymie President Trump’s agenda.

The effort is a response to GOP-led states, notably Texas, attempting to redraw their congressional maps to decrease Democratic ranks in the narrowly-divided U.S. House of Representatives at Trump’s behest.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Newsom, speaking to a fired-up partisan crowd at the Japanese American National Museum in downtown Los Angeles, said the effort by Republicans represented a desperate effort by a failed president to hold on to power by keeping Congress under Republican control.

“He doesn’t play by a different set of rules. He doesn’t believe in the rules,” Newsom said. “And as a consequence, we need to disabuse ourselves of the way things have been done. It’s not good enough to just hold hands, have a candlelight vigil and talk about the way the world should be. We have got to recognize the cards that have been dealt, and we have got to meet fire with fire.”

The governor was joined by Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff; Rep. Pete Aguilar, (D-San Bernardino), the chair of the House Democratic Caucus, and union leaders essential to providing the funding and volunteers to convince Californians to vote for the “Election Rigging Response Act.” The proposed California ballot measure would temporarily toss out the congressional districts enacted by the state’s voter-approved, independent redistricting commission.

“Our union stands in full support of this ballot initiative. We are ready to do whatever it takes to stop this power grab and fight back against any and all attacks on our democracy, on our students and on public education,” said Erica Jones, the secretary treasurer of the California Teachers Assn., which represents 310,000 public school teachers.

She said school children have suffered because of the Trump administration’s immigration raids, as well as cuts to healthcare funding, after school programs and teacher trainings.

“Our students deserve better,” she said. “The majority of Americans are not with him on these vicious attacks. So what does Trump want to do? Rig the next election and steal our right to fair representation? He wants to stack the deck to keep slashing public services to pad the pockets of his billionaire donors.”

Outside the political rally, Border Patrol agents gathered and arrested at least one person. Newsom told the crowd inside that he doubted it was a coincidence.

Supporters of the independent commission that currently draws California’s congressional maps criticized Democrats’ efforts to conduct a highly unusual mid-decade redistricting plan. For Newsom’s plant to work, the Democratic-led state Legislature must vote in favor of placing the measure on the ballot in a special election in November, and then the final decision will be up to California voters.

“Two wrongs do not make a right, and California shouldn’t stoop to the same tactics as Texas. Instead, we should push other states to adopt our independent, non-partisan commission model across the country,” said Amy Thoma, spokesperson for the Voters First Coalition, which includes Charles Munger Jr., the son of a billionaire who bankrolled the ballot measure that created the independent commission.

Munger will vigorously oppose any proposal to circumvent the independent commission, she said.

Since voters approved independent congressional redistricting in 2010, California’s districts have been drawn once per decade, following the U.S. Census, by a panel split between registered Democrats, registered Republicans and voters without a party preference.

The commission is not allowed to consider the partisan makeup of the districts, nor protecting incumbents, but instead looks at “communities of interest,” logical geographical boundaries and the Voting Rights Act.

The current map was drawn in 2021 and went into effect for the 2022 election.

Newsom is pushing to suspend those district lines and put a new map tailored to favor Democrats in front of voters on Nov. 4. That plan, he has said, would have a “trigger,” meaning a redrawn map would not take effect unless Texas or another GOP-led state moved forward with its own.

Sara Sadhwani, who served on the redistricting commission that approved the current congressional district boundaries, said that while she is deeply proud of the work she and her colleagues completed, she approved of Newsom’s effort to temporarily put the commission’s work aside because of the unprecedented threats to American democracy.

“These are extraordinary times, and extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures,” said Sadhwani, citing the immigration raids, the encouragement of political violence and the use of National Guard troops in American cities. “And if that wasn’t enough, we are watching executive overreach that no doubt is making our founding fathers turn in their graves, and we have to take action. These are the hallmarks of a democracy in peril.”

If voters approved the ballot measure, the new maps would be in effect until the independent commission redraws the congressional boundaries in 2031.

To meet Newsom’s ambitious deadline, the state Legislature would need to pass the ballot language by a two-thirds majority and send it to Newsom’s desk by Aug. 22. The governor’s office and legislative leaders are confident in their ability to meet this threshold in the state Assembly and state Senate, where Democrats have a supermajority.

Newsom first mentioned the idea in mid July, meaning the whole process could be done in about five weeks. Generally, redrawing the state’s electoral lines and certifying a measure to appear before voters on the ballot are processes that take months, if not more than a year.

Trump’s prodding of Texas Republicans to redraw their congressional maps to create five new GOP seats has kicked off redistricting battles across the nation.

That includes Florida, Ohio, Indiana and Missouri, where Republicans control the statehouse, and New York, Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, Oregon and Washington, where Democrats are in power.

Democratic lawmakers in Texas fled the state to block the Republican-led legislature from approving a new map that would gerrymander congressional districts to favor of the GOP. The Democrats maneuver worked, since it prevented the legislature from have a quorum necessary to approve the measure. A second special session is expected to begin Friday. The absent lawmakers are facing threats of fines, civil arrest warrants and calls for being removed from office; Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has vowed to call repeated special sessions until the map is approved.

In California, the gerrymandering plan taking shape behind closed doors would increase the Democratic Party’s dominance in the state by making five House districts more favorable to Democrats, according to a draft map reviewed by The Times.

Those changes could reduce by more than half the number of Republicans representing California in Congress. The state has the nation’s largest congressional delegation, with 52 members. Nine are Republicans.

A Northern California district represented by Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale) could shift to the south, shedding rural, conservative voters near the Oregon border and picking up left-leaning cities in Sonoma County. Sacramento-area Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin) would see his district shift toward the bluer center of the city.

The plan would also add more Democrats to the Central Valley district represented by Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford), who has been a perennial target for Democrats.

Southern California would see some of the biggest changes: Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Bonsall) would see his safely Republican district in San Diego County become more purple through the addition of liberal Palm Springs. And Reps. Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills) and Ken Calvert (R-Corona) would be drawn into the same district, which could force the lawmakers to run against each other.

The plan would also shore up Democrats who represent swing districts, such as Reps. Dave Min (D-Irvine) and Derek Tran (D-Orange).

It could also add another district in southeast Los Angeles County, in the area that elected the first Latino member of Congress from California in modern history. A similar seat was eliminated during the 2021 redistricting.

Times staff writer Taryn Luna contributed to this report from Sacramento.

SACRAMENTO — California became center stage for the national political fight over House seats Friday when Gov. Gavin Newsom welcomed Democratic lawmakers from Texas who fled their home state to foil President Trump’s plans to redraw Congressional districts.

California lawmakers plan to respond with their own plan to gerrymander districts to favor Democrats and neutralize any Republican seats gained in Texas in 2026, with a proposed map expected to become public next week, Newsom said at a press conference after meeting with the lawmakers.

“Make no mistake, California is moving forward,” the governor said. “We are talking about emergency measures to respond to what’s happening in Texas, and we will nullify what happens in Texas.”

He noted that while Democrats still support the state’s independent redistricting commission, they must counter Trump’s plan in GOP-led states to give their party a better chance in next year’s midterm election.

“They drew first blood,” he later added of Republicans.

Asked about the gathering, a Trump administration spokesperson said Newsom was seeking the limelight to further his political ambitions.

“Gavin Newsom is a loser of the highest order and he will never be president, no matter how hard he prostitutes himself to the press,” said the spokesperson, Steven Cheung.

Friday marked the second time in two weeks that Texas Democrats have stood next to Newsom at the California Governor’s Mansion and warned that Republican efforts to draw a new map in their state would dilute the power of Black and brown voters.

The Democrats hoped that their departure would leave the state Legislature with too few members present to change the map in a special session. They face $500 fines for each day of absence, as well as threats of arrest and removal from office by Gov. Greg Abbott and other Texas GOP officials. Some of the Democratic lawmakers were evacuated from a Chicago hotel where they were staying after a bomb threat on Wednesday.

“We are now facing threats — the threat that we’re going to lose our jobs, the threat of financial ruin, the threat that we will be hunted down as our colleagues sit on their hands and remain silent, as we all get personal threats to our lives,” said Texas state Rep. Ann Johnson (D-Houston), one of six Texas lawmakers at the press conference, who was among those evacuated from the Chicago hotel. “We as Democrats are standing up to ensure that the voices of every voter is lifted up in this next election, and that the next election is not stolen from them.”

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco); Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose), chair of the California Democratic congressional delegation; Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg); Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) and other elected officials joined the meeting in a show of unity as California Democrats attempt to convince their own state’s voters to fight back.

Pelosi noted that the state’s congressional delegation is united in backing the redistricting proposal to counter Trump.

“The President has paved over the Rose Garden. He’s paved over freedom of speech. He’s paved over freedom of education, [an] independent judiciary, the rule of law,” Pelosi said. “He’s gone too far. We will not let him pave over free and fair elections in our country, starting with what he’s trying to do in Texas.”

She fought back against an argument some have made — that two wrongs don’t make a right.

“This is self-defense for our democracy,” she said.

The California plan calls for the state Legislature to approve a constitutional amendment establishing new Congressional voting districts crafted to make GOP members vulnerable.

Passage of the bill would result in a special election on Nov. 4, with California voters deciding if the state should temporarily pause the congressional boundaries created by an independent redistricting commission in 2021 and adopt new maps for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections.

If approved by voters, the measure would include a “trigger” specifying that it would only take effect if Texas or other Republican-led states follow through with redrawing their maps to boost GOP seats before the midterm election. California would revert to its existing redistricting law after the next census and before the 2032 election.

At least so far, California voters appear uncertain about whether they want to swap Newsom’s plan for the independent redistricting system they previously adopted at the ballot box.

An Emerson College poll found support for redrawing California’s congressional map at 33% and opposition at 25%. The survey of 1,000 registered voters, conducted Aug. 4 and 5, found that 42% were undecided.

Newsom has expressed confidence that California voters will back his plan, which he is casting as a rebuttal to Trump’s efforts to “rig” the midterm elections.

“I’m confident we’ll get it when people know what it is and what it’s not, and I think, at the end of the day, they understand what’s at stake,” Newsom said Thursday.

Newsom argues that California’s process is more transparent than Trump’s because voters here will see the map and decide if the state should go forward with it.

To fulfill Trump’s request for five additional seats, Abbott is attempting to redraw House districts in Texas through a state legislative process that does not require voter approval. It’s unclear what will happen in Austin, with Democrats determined to block the effort and Abbott and other Texas Republicans insisting they will keep pressing it.

The current special session ends on Aug. 19. But in an interview with NBC News Thursday evening, Abbott vowed “to call special session after special session after special session with the same agenda items on there.”

In addition to arrest on civil warrants, the Democrats are facing threats of being removed from office. Direct-deposit payments to the legislators have been curtailed, forcing them to pick up their checks in person at the state capitol in Austin or go without the money.

The redistricting fight has strengthened Newsom’s national platform as a potential 2028 presidential contender and bolstered his reputation as a Democrat willing to take the fight to Trump and his allies.

Since Trump took office in January, Newom had been walking a fine line between calling out the president and playing nice in hopes of being able to work together to rebuild from the California wildfires.

But the gloves came off after Trump deployed the National Guard during federal immigration raids in Los Angeles in June, prompting the governor and his administration to much more aggressively push back on the president’s conservative agenda.

Gov. Gavin Newsom stood alongside six Democrats from the Texas Legislature on Friday and joined them in accusing President Trump and Republicans of trying to “rig” elections to hold onto congressional seats next year.

“They play by a different set of rules and we could sit back and act as if we have some moral authority and watch this 249-, 250-year-old experiment be washed away,” Newsom said of the nation’s history. “We are not going to allow that to happen.”

The Texas lawmakers and the governor spoke with reporters after meeting privately at the Governor’s Mansion in Sacramento to discuss a national political fight over electoral maps that could alter the outcome of the midterm elections and balance of power in Congress.

At the urging of President Trump, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called his state Legislature into a special session this week that includes a call to redistrict the Lone Star State to help Republicans pick up seats in Congress.

The move is part of a gerrymandering effort pushed by Trump to prevent the GOP from losing control of the House of Representatives next year. If Democrats take the House, they could derail the president’s agenda, which has so far included a crackdown on undocumented immigrants, tariffs on imports, rescinding efforts to combat climate change and undercutting state protections for the LGTBQ+ community, among other policy priorities.

Newsom has threatened to mirror Trump’s tactics and said he’s in talks with leaders of the California Legislature to redraw the state’s congressional districts to favor electing more Democrats and fewer Republicans.

Texas Democrats, who said they traveled to California to meet with the governor and explain the state of play in Texas, pledged do everything in their power to push back against Trump’s plan.

“We’re going to use every tool at our disposal in the state of Texas to confront this very illegal redistricting process that is going to be done on the backs of historic African American and Latino districts,” said Texas state Rep. Rafael Anchía.

Another group of Texas lawmakers are expected to meet with Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker in Chicago.

Changing the maps to benefit Democrats is a massive departure from California’s work over the last decade to remove political partisanship from the redistricting process.

California voters in 2010 gave an independent Citizens Redistricting Commission the power to determine the boundaries of voting districts for the U.S. House of Representatives instead of leaving that authority with the state Legislature.

To redistrict before the midterms, the most legally sound option is for state lawmakers to send a constitutional amendment to voters that seeks to allow changes to the voter map outside the boundaries of California’s independent redistricting process. The vote would need to happen in a special election before the June primary.

Newsom has said he’s also exploring a potential legal loophole that could allow the California Legislature to redraw the congressional maps themselves with a two-thirds vote.

The governor’s office said state law charges the redistricting commission with crafting new maps after a census, which is conducted about every 10 years. But they say the law is silent on everything that happens in between that time period.

Newsom’s lawyers believe it could be possible for the Legislature to redistrict congressional seats mid-decade on its own without going to the ballot.

The governor’s call to fight Trump using his own gerrymandering tactics has drawn a mixed response.

Newsom argues that Democrats will continue to lose if they remain the only party that plays by the rules. But others worry about the integrity of electoral outcomes across the nation if political parties in every state resort to naked political gamesmanship to gain control.

Texas Republicans have long been accused of crafting political maps to dilute the power of Black and Latino voters, which led to an ongoing lawsuit from 2021. Newsom’s effort in California would effectively seek to increase the share of Democrats in Republican-held districts.

Redistricting experts in California say redrawing the maps in the Golden State could create the potential for Democrats to flip at least five of the seats held by GOP incumbents.

Democrats may have the potential for greater gains from gerrymandering, particularly in places such as California that have attempted to practice nonpartisan redistricting, compared to states such as Texas, where maps are already drawn in favor of Republicans.

“It should be no surprise to anybody who covers Texas that every decade since 1970 Texas has been found to discriminate against people of color in its redistricting process,” Anchía said.

“In trying to do this, it is going to create great harm, not only to the people we represent, to the voters of the state of Texas, but also potentially to all Americans,” he said about Trump’s plan.

It’s common for the party in control of the White House to lose seats nationally in the first election after a presidential contest. Republicans hold majorities in the Senate and the House, and losing power to Democrats could be detrimental to Trump’s presidency.

Trump’s job approval rating dropped to a second-term low of 37% in a Gallup poll conducted earlier this month. The dip is just above his lowest approval rating ever of 34% at the end of his first term.

Trump has said publicly that he thinks it’s possible for Republicans to redistrict and pick up five seats in Texas, with the potential for gains in other states that redraw their maps.

In 2010, California voters drove the foxes from the henhouse, seeing to it that lawmakers in Washington and Sacramento would no longer have the power to draw congressional districts to suit themselves.

It wasn’t close.

Proposition 20 passed by a lopsided 61%-to-38% margin, giving congressional line-drawing authority to an independent mapmaking commission and thus ending decades of pro forma elections by injecting much-needed competition into California’s House races.

Now, Gov. Gavin Newsom is talking about undoing voters’ handiwork.

Newsom said he may seek to cancel the commission, tear up the boundaries it drew and let Democratic partisans draft a new set of lines ahead of next year’s midterm election — all to push back on President Trump and Texas Republicans, who are attempting a raw power grab to enhance the GOP’s standing in 2026.

The threatened move is a long shot and, more than anything, a ploy to boost Newsom’s White House ambitions.

It’s also highly presumptuous on his part, reflecting an increased arrogance among lawmakers around the country who are saying to voters, in effect, “Thank you for your input. Now go away.”

Take what just happened in Missouri. Last year, 58% of voters approved a ballot measure increasing the state minimum wage and requiring employers to provide paid sick leave. This month, Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe signed legislation that limited the minimum wage increase and scrapped the sick leave requirement altogether.

In two other states, Alaska and Nebraska, lawmakers similarly tried but failed to, respectively, overturn voter-passed measures on paid sick leave and a hike in the minimum wage.

“It’s a damning indictment of representative democracy when elected officials are scared of the will of their own voters,” said Alexis Magnan-Callaway of the Fairness Project, a union-backed advocacy group that focuses on state ballot measures.

It is indeed.

But it’s part of a pattern in recent years of lawmakers, mainly in Republican-led states, undercutting or working to roll back voter-designed measures to enshrine abortion rights, expand Medicare and raise the minimum wage.

To be clear, those measures were passed by voters of all stripes: Democrats, Republicans, independents.

“People are transcending party lines to vote for issues that they know will impact their communities,” said Chris Melody Fields Figueredo, executive director of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, a progressive organization. By ignoring or working to nullify the result, she said, lawmakers are helping contribute “to what we’re seeing across the country, where people are losing faith in our institutions and in government.”

And why wouldn’t they, if politicians pay no mind save to ask for their vote come election time?

In a direct attack on the initiative process, at least nine state legislatures passed or considered laws in their most recent session making it harder — and perhaps even impossible — for citizens to place measures on the ballot and seek a popular vote.

There can be issues with direct democracy, as Sean Morales-Doyle of the Brennan Center for Justice pointed out.

“There can be times when systems can be abused to confuse voters,” he said, “or where voters do things without maybe fully understanding what it is they’re doing, because of the way ballot measures are drafted or ballot summaries are offered.”

But it’s one thing to address those glitches, Morales-Doyle said, and “another thing to just basically say that we, as the representatives of voters, disagree with what voters think the best policy is and so we’re going to make it harder for them to enact the policy that they desire.”

In Texas, Republicans are wielding their lopsided power in hopes of erasing as many as five Democratic-leaning congressional seats, boosting the GOP’s chances of keeping control of the House in the 2026 midterm election. Trump, staring at the prospect of an emboldened, subpoena-wielding Democratic House majority, is backing the effort whole-hog.

That, Newsom said, is the fighting-fire-with-fire reason to tear up California’s congressional map and gerrymander the state for Democrats just as egregiously as Texas Republicans hope to do. “We can sit on the sidelines, talk about the way the world should be. Or, we can recognize the existential nature that is this moment,” the governor asserted.

It’s awfully hard to argue against corralling the errant Trump and his Republican enablers. Still, that’s no reason to ignore the express will of California voters when it comes to reining in their own lawmakers.

Taking Newsom’s gerrymander threat at face value, there are two ways he could possibly override Proposition 20.

He could break the law and win passage of legislation drawing new congressional districts, face an inevitable lawsuit and hope to win a favorable ruling from the California Supreme Court. Or he could call a costly special election and ask voters to reverse themselves and eliminate the state’s nonpartisan redistricting commission, at least for the time being.

It’s a hard sell. One presumes Newsom’s message to Californians would not be: “Let’s spend hundreds of millions of your tax dollars so you can surrender your power and return it to politicians working their will in the backrooms of Washington and Sacramento.”

But that’s the gist of what they would be asked to do, which bespeaks no small amount of hubris on Newsom’s part.

If elections are going to matter — especially at a time our democracy is teetering so — politicians have to accept the results, whether they like them or not.

Otherwise, what’s the point of having elections?

California is having a bummer of a political summer.

With the state under daily siege by the Trump administration, Los Angeles occupied by federal troops and our gallivanting governor busy running for president, is it really any surprise?

A recent UC Irvine poll found that residents, by a 2-to-1 margin, believe California is headed on the wrong track, a mood consistent with other gauges of Golden State grumpiness.

Why the sad faces?

“We are so divided as a country that people feel like there’s no common purpose and the other guys are out there about to do mayhem to the things that they believe in,” said Jon Gould, dean of UC Irvine’s School of Social Ecology. “Number two, there is a substantial portion of people who feel that their economic situation is worse than it was four years ago, two years ago, one year ago.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom also gets some credit, er, blame for the state’s darkened disposition.

A poll conducted by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies found California voters have little faith in their chief executive as he rounds the turn toward his final year in office. (Which may be one reason Newsom would rather spend time laying the groundwork for a 2028 White House bid.)

Only 14% of voters surveyed had “a lot” of trust in Newsom to act in the best interests of the California public, while another 28% trusted him “somewhat.” Fifty-three percent had no trust in the governor, or only “a little.”

Not a strong foundation for a presidential campaign, but Potomac fever is a powerful thing.

The Democratic-run Legislature fared about the same in the Berkeley survey.

Forty-four percent of respondents had either a lot or some degree of trust in Sacramento lawmakers — not a great look, but a number that positively shines compared to attitudes toward California’s tech companies and their leaders as they increasingly try to spread their overweening influence to politics. Only 4% had a lot of trust in the companies acting in the best interest of the California public; nearly six in 10 did not trust them at all. (There was similarly little faith in business groups.)

But it’s not just the state’s leaders and institutions that fail to engender much trust or goodwill.

A survey by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found residents have also soured on the three branches of the federal government.

Fewer than a third of Californians expressed approval for President Trump and the conservative-leaning Supreme Court. Just 2 in 10 Californians approved of the job Congress is doing.

Some of that is colored by partisan attitudes. Registered Democrats make up the largest portion of the electorate and, obviously, most aren’t happy with the GOP stranglehold on Washington. But that distrust transcended red and blue loyalties.

Overall, 8 in 10 adults said they do not fully trust the federal government to do what is right. A nearly identical percentage said they trust the government to do what is right only some of the time.

That, too, is part of a long-standing pattern.

“It’s a concern, but it’s not a new concern,” said Mark Baldassare, who directs research for the Public Policy Institute. “It’s been around in some form for decades.”

Back in 1958, when the National Election Study first asked, about three-quarters of Americans trusted the federal government to do the right thing almost always or most of the time — a level of faith that, today, sounds like it comes from people in another galaxy.

Starting in the 1960s, with the escalation of the Vietnam War, and continuing through the Watergate scandal of the 1970s, that trust has steadily eroded. The last time the Pew Research Center asked the question, in the spring of 2024, just 35% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents nationwide said they trusted the federal government just about always or most of the time. That compared to just 11% of Republicans and Republican leaners.

What’s new — and perhaps most troubling — in the recent batch of opinion surveys are growing fears for the state of our democracy.

Nearly two-thirds of those sampled in the Berkeley poll felt that “American democracy is under attack” and another 26% described it as “being tested.” Only 1 in 10 said our democracy is in “no danger.”

America has had some knock-down political fights in recent decades. But it’s only in the Trump era, with his incessant lying about the 2020 election and assault on the rule of law, that the durability of our democracy has become a widespread concern.

Pollsters didn’t even ask that question “10 years ago, 20 years ago, because it was just inconceivable,” said Eric Schickler, who co-directs Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies.

“Even in moments when people were mad, say after [Hurricane] Katrina, Iraq with Bush, or amid the Lewinsky scandal or various other moments of trouble and conflict you would never have seen… 64% say American democracy is under attack and only 10% saying democracy is not in danger,” Schickler said. “That’s just a pretty stunning number … and I think it suggests something really different is going on now.”

Perhaps this is just a temporary cloud, like the coastal fog that dissipates as summer rolls on?

“In the short to medium term, I’m not optimistic,” Schickler said. “I think that the problems that we have, the challenges, have just been growing over a period of time. Starting before the Trump era, for sure, but then accelerating in recent years. I think we’re heading more toward a politics where there just aren’t limits on what a party in power is going to do or try to accomplish, and the other party is an enemy and that’s a really bad dynamic.”

Oh, well.

There’s always the mountains, beach and desert offering Californians an escape.

SACRAMENTO — An overwhelming number of California voters think American democracy is being threatened or, at the very least, tested, according to a new poll released Thursday by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies.

The poll, conducted for the nonprofit Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr. Fund, found that concerns cut across the partisan spectrum. They are shared regardless of income or education level, race or ethnicity. Californians living in big cities and rural countrysides, young and old, expressed similar unease.

“I do think that it’s at a pretty dangerous point right now. The concerns are justified,” said political scientist Eric Schickler, co-director of the Berkeley institute. “Our democracy is not healthy when you have a president that’s acting to unilaterally stop money from being spent that’s been appropriated, or going to war with colleges and universities or sending troops to L.A.”

In the survey, 64% of California voters said they thought American democracy was under attack, and 26% felt our system of government was being tested but was not under attack. The poll did not investigate what voters blamed for putting democracy in peril.

Democrats, who dominate the California electorate, were the most fearful, with 81% saying it was under attack and 16% who described democracy as being tested. Among voters registered as “no party preference” or with other political parties, 61% felt democracy was under assault, and 32% said it was being tested.

Republicans expressed more faith — nearly a quarter of those polled said they felt democracy was in no danger. But 38% said it was under attack and 39% said it was being tested but not under attack.

Concerns among Democrats may have been expected in California, given the state’s liberal tilt and the widespread and relentless government upheaval since President Trump took office in January. But the opinions shared by Republicans indicates just how pervasive the concerns are about the future of a country seen as a worldwide beacon of freedom and democracy.

Emily Ekins, director of polling for the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, said those findings are evidence of an unsettling new development in American politics.

“A couple years ago, Republicans felt that democracy was at risk and now Democrats feel that democracy is at risk. I think that this is pretty worrisome, because people are starting to view the stakes of each election as being higher and higher,” said Ekins, who had no involvement with the Berkeley poll. “They may feel like they could lose their rights and freedoms. They may not feel like the rules apply to them anymore because they feel like so much is on the line.”

Schickler said the political perceptions among Republicans have been recently fed, in part, by Trump’s baseless claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him. Continuous allegations that the U.S. Department. of Justice, including the FBI, and a “deep state” federal government bureaucracy were weaponized against him since his first term in office also contributed to the fear.

Those claims were magnified by conservative news outlets, including Fox News, as well as Trump loyalists on social media, popular podcasts and talk shows.

Even some Republicans who support the president or are agnostic about his tenure are likely concerned about the discord in American politics in recent months, Schickler said, especially after the Trump administration sent U.S. Marines and the California National Guard to the streets of Los Angeles as a protective force during widespread federal immigration raids and subsequent protests.

Recent decisions by media companies to settle Trump’s lawsuits over complaints about stories and coverage also are concerning, he said, despite the merits of those allegations being suspect.

This month, Paramount Global decided to pay $16 million to settle Trump’s lawsuit over a “60 Minutes” interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris; the president claimed it was done to help her presidential campaign against him. Paramount’s leaders hope the settlement will help clear a path for Trump-appointed regulators to bless the company’s $8-billion sale to David Ellison’s Skydance Media.

“That’s not how a democracy is supposed to work,” Schickler said. “I think the voters’ concerns are rooted in a reality, one that’s been building up for a while. It’s not something that’s just started in 2025 but it’s been kind of gradually getting more serious over the last 20 or 30 years.”

The survey also found that 75% of California voters believe strongly or somewhat that special interest money has too much influence in state politics, a sentiment especially strong among Republicans.

Slim majorities of California voters had little or no trust that Gov. Gavin Newsom and the state Legislature act in the best interest of the public. According to the poll, 42% of voters said they have a lot or some trust in Newsom to act in the public’s interest; 53% said they trust his actions just a little or not at all.

Those surveyed had similar sentiments about the legislature.

The courts received the most favorable marks, with 57% of voters saying they trusted the judicial system to act in the best interest of the public.

Technology companies and their leaders were labeled completely untrustworthy by 58% of those surveyed.

Russia Chavis Cardenas, deputy director of the nonpartisan government accountability organization group California Common Cause, which has received grants from the poll-sponsoring Haas Fund, said the findings show just how much special interest influence in Sacramento, and Washington, erodes public trust in government, which may provide insight into their concerns about the health of the American democracy.

“I want to see folks from every political party, every race and every walk of life to be able to be engaged in their democracy, to be able to have a say, to be able to have representation,” Chavis Cardinas said.

“So these numbers are concerning, but they also don’t lie,” she said. “They’re letting us know that folks here in California recognize the influence that big money has, and that the tech companies have too much power over elected officials.”

The poll surveyed 6,474 registered voters throughout California from June 2-6.

SACRAMENTO — The vast majority of California voters support expanding access to translated ballots for people who speak limited English, an effort that would likely increase turnout, a new poll found.

That finding comes from a poll released Monday by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, which conducted the survey in five languages — English, Spanish, Chinese, Korean and Vietnamese — to capture voter sentiment in a state where more than a quarter of residents are foreign born.

The poll, conducted for the nonprofit Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr. Fund, found that about 70% of California’s registered voters agreed that eligible voters who speak limited English should be provided with ballots translated into their preferred language. Support was strong among all age groups, races and ethnicities, as well as among Democrats and independent voters. Republicans were closely divided.

“I think in the country as a whole there’s a lot of debate and struggle over how inclusive a democracy we’re going to be and a lot of controversy over immigration, immigrant rights, immigrant inclusion,” said political scientist Eric Schickler, co-director of the Institute of Governmental Studies. “It’s timely just thinking about the question of inclusion of different groups — who feels fully American and is allowed to feel fully American in our political system.”

Schickler and others said that, according to the latest estimates, more than 3 million registered voters in California self-identify as limited-English proficient. As of February, just under 23 million Californians were registered to vote.

Under state and federal law, California is required to provide bilingual voting assistance to Spanish speakers. Nine counties — Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Orange, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara — must provide voting materials in at least one language other than English or Spanish.

Translated sample ballots and other assistance also must be made available in Spanish or other languages in counties or precincts where the state has determined at least 3% of the voting-age residents are members of a single-language minority and don’t understand English well enough to vote without assistance.

The Berkeley survey found that 82% of Democrats supported providing translated ballot materials to limited-English voters, as did 72% of voters registered as “no party preference.” Among Republicans, 45% supported providing the translated ballots, while 42% did not.

According to the poll, most California voters also favored a proposal that recently went before the state Legislature that would have allowed all limited-English-speaking communities that meet a minimum threshold in a county to receive translated versions of all voting materials.

Legislation to that effect, SB 266, proposed by Sen. Sabrina Cervantes (D-Riverside), failed to pass out of the Senate Appropriations Committee. A more ambitious bill to expand access to translated ballots and materials, AB 884, passed the Legislature in 2024, but was vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The governor stated that while he supported expanding ballot access, the bill would have cost tens of millions of dollars not included in the budget.

Providing translated ballots to California voters with limited English proficiency is critical in a state that is home to such a diverse electorate — and is known for its complex state and local ballot measures, said Rosalind Gold of the National Assn. of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund.

“Even folks who are very educated and native-born English speakers find trying to decipher the description of a ballot measure and what it means to be challenging,” Gold said.

Providing translated sample ballots and other election materials to voters does not go far enough, she said: The official ballots themselves, whether for Californians who vote by mail or those who vote at polling stations, should be provided in a voter’s preferred language.

“It is difficult to basically, kind of go back and forth between the ballot you’re going to be marking your choices on and a sample ballot or a facsimile ballot that’s in your native language,” Gold said. “When people can directly vote on a ballot that is in a language that they are more familiar with, it just demystifies the whole process.”

The Berkeley survey found that, among limited-English speakers who lacked access to translated election materials or were unsure if it was provided, 87% said they would be more likely to vote in future elections if they received a ballot in their preferred language. A similar number said receiving those translated ballots would make it easier for them to vote.

The poll surveyed 6,474 registered voters throughout California from June 2-6.

When U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla was forcibly removed from a news conference held by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, it was almost as if Donald Trump’s most well-worn talking point came to life:

A bad hombre tried to go after a white American.

All Padilla did was identify himself and try to question Noem about the immigration raids across Southern California that have led to protests and terror. Instead, federal agents pushed the senator into a hallway, forced him to the ground and handcuffed him before he was released. He and Noem talked privately afterward, yet she claimed to reporters that Padilla “lung[ed]” at her despite them being far apart and video showing no evidence to back up her laughable assertion.

(The claim was in keeping with Noem’s pronouncements this week. On Tuesday, she accused Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum of encouraging violent protests in L.A. when the president actually called for calm.)

The manhandling of Padilla on Thursday and his subsequent depiction by conservatives as a modern-day Pancho Villa isn’t surprising one bit. Trashing people of Mexican heritage has been one of Trump’s most successful electoral planks — don’t forget that he kicked off his 2016 presidential campaigns by proclaiming Mexican immigrants to be “rapists” and drug smugglers — because he knows it works. You could be a newcomer from Jalisco, you could be someone whose ancestors put down roots before the Mayflower, it doesn’t matter: For centuries, the default stance in this country is to look at anyone with family ties to our neighbor to the south with skepticism, if not outright hate.

It was the driving force behind the Mexican-American War and subsequent robbing of land from the Mexicans who decided to stay in the conquered territory. It was the basis for the legal segregation of Mexicans across the American Southwest in the first half of the 20th century and continues to fuel stereotypes of oversexed women and criminal men that still live on mainstream and social media.

These anti-Mexican sentiments are why California voters passed a slew of xenophobic local and state measures in the 1980s and 1990s when the state’s demographics began to dramatically change. Conservative politicians and pundits alike claimed Mexico was trying to reclaim the American Southwest and called the conspiracy the “Reconquista,” after the centuries-long push by Spaniards to take back the Iberian Peninsula from the Moors during the Middle Ages.

A man holds a Mexican flag at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Los Angeles on June 8, 2025.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

The echoes of that era continue to reverberate in MAGAland. It’s why Trump went on social media to describe L.A. as a city besieged by a “Migrant Invasion” when people began to rally against all the immigration raids that kicked off last week and led to his draconian deployment of the National Guard and Marines to L.A. as if we were Fallouja in the Iraq war. It’s what led the White House’s Instagram account Wednesday to share the image of a stern-looking Uncle Sam putting up a poster stating “Help your country … and yourself” above the slogan “Report All Foreign Invaders” and a telephone number for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

It’s what led U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli to post a photo on his official social media account of SEIU California President David Huerta roughed up and in handcuffs after he was arrested for allegedly blocking the path of ICE agents trying to serve a search warrant on a factory in the Garment District. It’s why Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called in the National Guard before planned protests in San Antonio, one of the cradles of Latino political power in the United States and the home of the Alamo. It’s why there are reports that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wants to rename a naval ship honoring Chicano legend Cesar Chavez and has announced that the only U.S. military base named after a Latino, Ft. Cavazos in Texas, will drop its name.

And it’s what’s driving all the rabid responses to activists waving the Mexican flag. Vice President JD Vance described protesters as “insurrectionists carrying foreign flags” on social media. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller — Trump’s longtime anti-immigrant Iago — described L.A. as “occupied territory.” The president slimed protesters as “animals” and “foreign enemies.” In an address to Army soldiers prescreened for looks and loyalty at Ft. Bragg in North Carolina this week, he vowed, “The only flag that will wave triumphant over the city of Los Angeles is the American flag.”

The undue obsession with a piece of red, green and white cloth betrays this deep-rooted fear by Americans that we Mexicans are fundamentally invaders.

And to some, that idea sure seems to be true. Latinos are now the largest minority group in the U.S., a plurality in California and nearly a majority in L.A. and L.A. County — and Mexicans make up the largest segment of all those populations by far.

The truth of this demographic Reconquista, as I’ve been writing for a quarter of a century, is far more mundane.

Lupe Padilla, mother of then-Los Angeles City Councilman and current U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla, wipes a tear away as they watch a video presentation of his career during his last City Council meeting in 2006.

(Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times)

The so-called invading force of my generation assimilated to the point where our kids are named Brandon and Ashley in all sorts of spellings. The young adults and teenagers on the street wrapping themselves in the Mexican flag right now are chanting against ICE in English and blasting “They Not Like Us.” More than a few of the National Guard troops, police officers and Homeland Security officers those young Latino activists were heckling have Latino surnames on their uniforms, when they show any identification at all. Hell, enough Mexican Americans voted for Trump that they arguably swung the election to him.

Mexicans assimilate into the United States, a fact too many Americans will never believe no matter how many American flags we may wave. The best personification of this reality is Sen. Padilla.

This son of Mexican immigrants grew up in working class Pacoima and went to MIT before returning home to help found a political machine that gave a voice to Latinos in the San Fernando Valley that they never had. He was the first Latino president of the L.A. City Council, served in both chambers of the state Legislature and also as California’s secretary of state before becoming California’s first Latino U.S. senator.

When I met Padilla for lunch last year at my wife’s store in Santa Ana — in Calle Cuatro, the city’s historic Latino district, where now we can see the National Guard down the street blocking off a part of it — he struck me as the goody- two-shoes those who have worked with him have always portrayed him to be. In fact, that was always a progressive critique of him: He was too nice to properly stand up to the Trump administration.

That’s what makes Padilla’s ejection especially outrageous. He’s California’s senior California U.S. senator, someone with enough of a security clearance to be was in the same federal building where Noem was holding her press conference because he had a previous meeting with US Northern Command’s General Gregory Guillot. Tall, brown and deep-voiced, Padilla is immediately recognizable on Capitol Hill as one of a handful of Latino U.S. senators. He fought Noem’s nomination to became Homeland Security chief, so it makes no sense that she didn’t immediately recognize him.

Then again, Noem probably thought Padilla was just another Mexican.

Not anymore. If anything, conservatives should be more afraid of Mexicans now than ever. Because if a nice Mexican such as Alex Padilla could be fed up with hate against us enough to get tossed around by the feds in the name of preserving democracy, anyone can.

May we all be bad hombres now.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom’s 2025-26 revised budget proposal reneges on his signature policy to provide free healthcare coverage to all low-income undocumented immigrants as costs exceed expectations and the state anticipates challenging economic times ahead.

Newsom’s office said the governor’s spending plan, which will be released late Wednesday morning, calls for requiring all undocumented adults to pay $100 monthly premiums to receive Medi-Cal coverage and for blocking all new adult applications to the program as of Jan. 1.

The cost share will reduce the financial burden on the state and could lower the total number of people enrolled in the healthcare program if some immigrants cannot afford the new premiums. Freezing enrollment may prevent the price tag of the program from continuing to balloon after more people signed up for coverage than the state anticipated.

The governor’s office said the changes will save a combined $5.4 billion through 2028-29, but did not detail the cost savings in the upcoming fiscal year that begins July 1.

Newsom is expected Wednesday to project a deficit for California in the fiscal year ahead, which includes higher than expected Medi-Cal costs, and more significant shortfall estimates in the following years. In the current budget year, the governor and lawmakers approved a $2.8-billion appropriation and took out a separate $3.4-billion loan just to pay for extra expenses for Medi-Cal through June.

The rising costs have drawn criticism from Republicans and added pressure on Democrats to consider scaling back coverage for immigrants. A recent poll found strong support among California voters for offering free healthcare to undocumented children. Just over half of voters supported providing the healthcare to eligible immigrants 50 years old or above, and a plurality — 49% — favored providing the coverage to adults between the ages of 18 and 49.

Medi-Cal, the California offshoot of the federal Medicaid program, provides healthcare coverage to eligible low-income residents. After the Republican Congress this year passed a budget blueprint that includes billions of dollars in spending reductions, fears also persist that cuts to federal Medicaid funding may be looming.

California became the first state in the nation to offer healthcare to all income-eligible immigrants one year ago after the expansion was approved by Newsom and the Democratic-led Legislature.

Gov. Jerry Brown, a Democrat, signed a bill in 2015 that offered Medi-Cal coverage to all children younger than 19.

Newsom grew the Medi-Cal coverage pool to include all income-eligible immigrants in California under a multiyear expansion by age categories that began in 2020 and concluded in 2024.

California’s new budget shortfall comes in addition to $27.3 billion in financial remedies, including $16.1 billion in cuts and a $7.1-billion withdrawal from the state’s rainy day fund, that lawmakers and the governor already agreed to make in 2025-26.

The deficit marks the third year in a row that Newsom and lawmakers have been forced to reduce spending after dedicating more money to programs than the state has available to spend. Poor projections, the high price tag of Democratic policy promises and a reluctance to make long-term sweeping cuts have added to the deficit at a time when the governor regularly touts California’s place as the fourth-largest economy in the world.

On Tuesday afternoon, Newsom’s office said President Trump’s tariff policies have also hurt California’s financial standing and projected that the state will lose out on $16 billion in revenue from January 2025 through June 2026 because of the levies on imported goods and the effect of economic uncertainty on the stock market.