# How I decided to vote for California Prop. 50 in November **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Tags:** trump\ **Created:** [September 30, 2025, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530 "2025-09-30T16:05:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Roderick\_Femm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/roderick_femm/32/14875_2.png) [@Roderick\_Femm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roderick_Femm)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/1 "2025-09-30T16:05:03Z")
Prop. 50 is designed to re-district California to (try to) add 5 Democratic seats to the House of Representatives in 2026, to offset the 5 seats that the Republicans are getting from re-districting in Texas. The idea is that, without either of these changes, the Democrats stand a good chance of re-taking the House due to dissatisfaction with Trump. I was originally very disturbed by this tit-for-tat behavior by Democrats, it seemed like a step backwards and an example of going low to see if they can match how low the Republicans go. But I can see that having a Democratic majority in the House for the last 2 years of Trump’s term is extremely important to possibly preserving the country until 2028. This tactic may not work on a practical level, but it is easily reversible, and so I think is worth the attempt. That I think this way is also a good measure of how desperate I feel about what will happen over the next three years. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/2 "2025-09-30T16:13:09Z")
I think it’s a pretty clear situation where unilateral disarmament isn’t a viable strategy. Once SCOTUS made it clear that they won’t enforce any constitutional rights around Congressional districting the only reasonable path (until/unless there is either an amendment to the Constitution or a change in SCOTUS) is replying in kind. There is also the silver lining that a push towards extreme partisan gerrymanders can backfire if there is a moderate-to-large swing in electoral preferences. Rather than creating an extremely resilient majority this new push seems to try to grab as many seats as possible at the risk of making them a bit less safe. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/3 "2025-09-30T16:15:01Z")
I think it is a case of the Greater Good vs. A Moral (but hollow) Victory. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/4 "2025-09-30T16:16:01Z")
I am so upset by this proposition. Everyone I respect is for it, and I can see their point, but I just hate it. I’m almost certainly going to vote for it, myself, though I will feel dirty when I do. I’m glad it has a sunset clause. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/5 "2025-09-30T16:16:28Z")
The closest I get to being a single-issue voter is with voting rights. So it _really_ irks me that even temporarily giving up voting rights is necessary. But it is necessary and I will vote in favor of it. > [@Roderick\_Femm](#): > > The idea is that, without either of these changes, the Democrats stand a good chance of re-taking the House due to dissatisfaction with Trump. Is this what you intended to write? ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/6 "2025-09-30T16:18:10Z")
> [@Dr.Drake](#): > > I’m almost certainly going to vote for it, myself, though I will feel dirty when I do. I think this is actually a side-effect the GOP wants. They know that liberals tend to be more idealistic, and making idealists jaded is a great way to make them not vote or get involved. Making it all seem like “dirty politics” and “lesser of two evils” is how they tamp down the youth vote (and idealist voters in general). ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/7 "2025-09-30T16:21:54Z")
We all seem to be in agreement. I hate the entire concept but I will be voting for it. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/8 "2025-09-30T16:22:22Z")
I think you’re right. Voting to move things in the wrong direction is really hard for me, and I can this it turning off a less determined voter, especially since this is the only item on the ballot for me. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/9 "2025-09-30T16:26:53Z")
It is the lesser of two evils, and I truly believe that passively letting the greater evil win by voting against this Proposition is itself an evil. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/10 "2025-09-30T16:27:16Z")
I feel kind of torn about this too. On the one hand, it’s blatant hypocrisy. On the other hand, a lot of villains won’t learn their lesson until you be a blatant hypocrite to them. Kind of like sports. Cheating is bad, but if one team keeps blatantly doing it and the refs are okay with it, then they won’t learn the lesson until you start cheating too. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/11 "2025-09-30T16:40:02Z")
It’s a special election. It’s the only item on the ballot for everyone. ---
**Author:** ![MonkeysBrother](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3ab097/32.png) [@MonkeysBrother](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MonkeysBrother)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/12 "2025-09-30T16:41:34Z")
Yeah, me too. I hate it, but I’ll probably vote for it. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/13 "2025-09-30T16:45:41Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > Kind of like sports. Cheating is bad, but if one team keeps blatantly doing it and the refs are okay with it, then they won’t learn the lesson until you start cheating too. I think this is a pretty good analogy. Maybe put slightly differently: the referees have decided that aggressive partisan gerrymanders are _not_ cheating. Even though laws have been drafted to say that they are, SCOTUS has thrown them out. So while you might prefer to be playing a game with fairer rules, the referees have decided that those rules are not to be enforced. So you can either keep taking the cheap shots and low blows and retain your “honor” while losing, or you can play by the rules that the referees have mandated. ---
**Author:** ![carrps](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carrps/32/2957_2.png) [@carrps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carrps)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/14 "2025-09-30T16:51:43Z")
> [@Jas09](#): > > So you can either keep taking the cheap shots and low blows and retain your “honor” while losing, or you can play by the rules that the referees have mandated. This. I’m voting for it. And I got a couple of cool “Don’t Poke the Bear” stickers from Newsom’s campaign. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/15 "2025-09-30T17:10:52Z")
> [@Jas09](#): > > Once SCOTUS made it clear that they won’t enforce any constitutional rights around Congressional districting There are no constitutional rights around House elections anymore. The states are forced to use districting and not any sort of proportional representation because > The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; **but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations** , except as to the places of choosing Senators. Except for the right to actually vote in the elections, what rights re: the Constitution are you thinking of? ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/16 "2025-09-30T17:17:23Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Except for the right to actually vote in the elections, what rights re: the Constitution are you thinking of? I thought that certain aspects of the Voting Rights Act were upheld under a 14th amendment argument. That the equal protection clause protected citizens against certain extreme gerrymanders that encroached on their right to vote and have their vote count. Obviously in declaring aspects of the VRA unconstitutional this particular SCOTUS does not agree with that interpretation, and have decided that any issue of gerrymandering for political purposes (separate from racial ones, which IMO Texas has also violated) is strictly a political question and not one for the courts to adjudicate. Some of the background I’m referring to is in this article: [https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt14-S1-8-6-1/ALDE\_00013630/](https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt14-S1-8-6-1/ALDE_00013630/) ---
**Author:** ![DeadTreasSecretaries](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deadtreassecretaries/32/4817_2.png) [@DeadTreasSecretaries](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DeadTreasSecretaries)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/17 "2025-09-30T17:33:21Z")
The VRA never banned pure partisan gerrymandering. What it did (and on paper still does) is ban racial gerrymandering. The protections against racial gerrymandering have been weakened by the Supreme Court over multiple decisions. The significance of this is that in the past there were several states especially GOP-led states in the south where the partisan makeup was close enough to the racial makeup that the ban on racial gerrymandering severely limited how much partisan gerrymandering these states could do. This is coupled with the fact that a number of states, both red abd blue weren’t playing constitutional hardball with gerrymandering. Since 2024 sone GOP-led states like Texas and I believe Ohio gerrymandered more than they had in the past which is the most direct motivation for blue states that also had the ability to gerrymander more than they were to respond. The scotus has never given any indication that congress would not be allowed to regulate partisan gerrymandering directly, it’s just an area where congress has never passed a reform and as a result no specific reform has been attempted and constitutionally tested. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/18 "2025-09-30T17:45:10Z")
> [@Jas09](#): > > I thought that certain aspects of the Voting Rights Act were upheld under a 14th amendment argument. I covered that with “the right to vote”. > [@Jas09](#): > > That the equal protection clause protected citizens against certain extreme gerrymanders that encroached on their right to vote and have their vote count. No, it was about gerrymandering that would eliminate minorities from having Representatives that look like them by making all districts 60% majority/40% minority. I don’t know the constitutional basis for that. ---
**Author:** ![Roderick\_Femm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/roderick_femm/32/14875_2.png) [@Roderick\_Femm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roderick_Femm)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/19 "2025-09-30T18:41:30Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > > [@Roderick\_Femm](#): > > > > The idea is that, without either of these changes, the Democrats stand a good chance of re-taking the House due to dissatisfaction with Trump. > > Is this what you intended to write? Yes. If it isn’t clear, I understood that the Texas move was done because the Republicans are expecting Democratic gains in the house at least big enough to take the Speakership, and that a swing of 5 votes back to the R column might be enough to keep the House in Republican control. The California move is to counteract the Texas move, so that the net effect for the two parties is back where it would have been without the Texas redistricting. (I also understood that other R states were going to try to squeeze out a few more R seats too, but I haven’t heard much about that for a while.) If you had a different question, please elucidate. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2025, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530/20 "2025-09-30T18:48:33Z")
> [@Roderick\_Femm](#): > > I also understood that other R states were going to try to squeeze out a few more R seats too, but I haven’t heard much about that for a while. Missouri just did. Down from 2 Democratic seats (one in KC, one in STL) to just one. A state that votes roughly 60/40 GOP/Dem will have a 7/1 congressional split. There are lawsuits and a ballot initiative to overturn the new maps, so it is unclear whether they will take effect next year. But they are signed law at this point. Also, to the point upthread about racial protections, the new map very clearly targets Black residents in the KC area by splitting their neighborhoods out into surrounding rural districts. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-i-decided-to-vote-for-california-prop-50-in-november/1023530.md?page=2)