What’s Up With California’s Prop 50? — A Non-Partisan Analysis from Ballotpedia

Overview

What would Proposition 50 change about congressional districts in California?

Ballotpedia reports: California Proposition 50, 2025

[Please see Ballotpedia for any and all links]

Proposition 50 would authorize the state to use a new congressional district map from Assembly Bill 604 (AB 604).[1]

The new congressional district map would be used to elect members of the U.S. House of Representatives from 2026 through 2030. The proposed map would replace the existing maps, which the 14-member Citizens Redistricting Commission adopted on December 27, 2021, for elections from 2022 through 2030. Proposition 50 would provide that the Citizens Redistricting Commission will redraw congressional districts in 2031.[1]

AB 604 contains the proposed congressional district map, which cannot take effect without voter approval of Proposition 50. According to Kyle Kondik and J. Miles Coleman, “this map would give Democrats a chance to win up to five additional seats. Three of their targeted seats would be fairly easy pickups, while two of them would be more like Toss-ups.”[2] The former three seats are Reps. Doug LaMalfa (R-1), Kevin Kiley (R-3), and Ken Calvert (R-41), while the latter two seats described as toss-ups are David Valadao (R-22) and Darrell Issa (R-48).[3] You can view the proposed map and analysis here.

Proposition 50 would also add language to the California Constitution declaring: “It is the policy of the State of California to support the use of fair, independent, and nonpartisan redistricting commissions nationwide. The people of the State of California call on the Congress of the United States to pass federal legislation and propose an amendment of the United States Constitution to require the use of fair, independent, and nonpartisan redistricting commissions nationwide.”[1]

Have other states pursued congressional redistricting in 2025?

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) proposed allowing the California State Legislature to redraw the state’s congressional districts ahead of elections in 2026. He said the ballot measure is intended to counter a mid-cycle redistricting proposal in Texas: “They’re not screwing around. We cannot afford to screw around either. We have got to fight fire with fire.”[4]

The Texas State Legislature approved a new congressional redistricting plan on August 22.[5] According to The Texas Tribune, the plan “[positioned] the GOP to net up to five additional seats in Texas.”[6] Gov. Greg Abbott (R) called a special session to address redistricting, among other issues, following a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice that said four districts were unconstitutional racial gerrymanders.[7] Rep. Todd Hunter (R-32), who co-authored the redistricting bill, said “the underlying goal of this plan is straight forward: improve Republican political performance,” and Sen. Phil King (R-10), the bill’s sponsor in the Senate, added, “if Texas does not take this action, there is an extreme risk that that Republican [congressional] majority will be lost.”[8] President Donald Trump (R) supported the legislation, saying, “I got the highest vote in the history of Texas, as you probably know, and we are entitled to five more seats.”[9]

Gov. Newsom said Proposition 50 “will nullify what happens in Texas. We will pick up five seats with the consent of the people, and that is the difference between the approach we’re taking and the approach [Texas Republicans are] taking.”[10]

Following Texas and California, the Missouri State Legislature also passed congressional redistricting legislation that divided Kansas City, Missouri, between three congressional districts.[11] President Trump said the map would “deliver a gigantic victory for Republicans in the ‘Show Me State,’ and across the country” and provide an “… opportunity to elect an additional MAGA Republican in the 2026 Midterm Elections.”[12] U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-5), whose district includes Kansas City, said, “President Trump’s unprecedented directive to redraw our maps in the middle of the decade and without an updated census is not an act of democracy — it is an unconstitutional attack against it.”[13] Opponents of the map are collecting signatures for a veto referendum to place the legislation on the ballot, where voters would decide whether to uphold or repeal the map.[14]

In the U.S. House of Representatives, both House Speaker Mike Johnson (R) and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D) commented on the redistricting efforts. Speaker Johnson said, “Democrats across the nation have played politics with redistricting for decades, and [California] is just the latest example. Republicans who are following state and federal laws will not be lectured by people who abused the system.”[15] Minority Leader Jeffries stated, “Donald Trump and House Republicans believe the only way they can win the midterm elections is to cheat.”[16] He also said, “California responded forcefully … and we will continue to respond, when necessary, across the country.”[17]

How did the state’s current redistricting process originate?

Debates over redistricting efforts occur against the backdrop of 100 years of redistricting-related ballot measures in California, with the topic appearing on the ballot at least 20 times since 1926. The current process, involving a non-politician commission, was established through ballot measures in 2008 and 2010, following the defeat of a related proposal in 2005.

In 2008, California Common Cause proposed Proposition 11, which transferred state legislative redistricting from the legislature to a 14-member California Citizens Redistricting Commission. Proposition 11 was approved, with 50.8% of the vote. Proposition 11 did not address congressional redistricting. In 2010, Charles T. Munger, Jr., a physicist and political donor, filed Proposition 20, which transferred congressional redistricting from the legislature to the California Citizens Redistricting Commission. Voters approved Proposition 20, with 61.2% of the vote.

Alongside Proposition 11, voters decided a competing ballot measure, Proposition 27, which would have eliminated the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, returning the state legislative redistricting process to the California State Legislature. Voters rejected the ballot initiative, with 59.4% voting ‘No.’

Since 2010, the California Citizens Redistricting Commission has conducted congressional redistricting twice—in 2011 and 2021. As of 2025, Democrats held 43 of the state’s 52 seats in the U.S. House, and Republicans held the other nine.

Who is funding the campaigns for and against Proposition 50?

As of October 6, about $137.0 million had been raised for and against Proposition 50. Supporters received $95.7 million, while opponents received $41.3 million.[18]

Support: The largest donor to the support campaign, the House Majority PAC (HMP), along with the associated HMP for Prop 50 PAC, contributed $11.0 million—11.5% of the campaign’s total funds. HMP is a super PAC that focuses on electing Democrats to the U.S. House of Representatives.

The second largest donor to the support campaign, the Fund for Policy Reform (FPR), contributed $10.0 million. FPR is a 501(c)(4) associated with the Open Society Foundations, founded by George Soros.[19][20][21] According to FPR’s Form 990, the organization’s mission is to support legislation that “assures greater fairness in political, legal and economic systems and safeguards fundamental rights.”[22]

The third largest donor was the California Nurses Association, which contributed $3.3 million.[18]

Opposition: The largest donor to the opposition campaign, Charles T. Munger, Jr., contributed $32.7 million—79.3% of the opposition’s total funds. Munger, a physicist and political donor, is the son of Charles Munger Sr., who was a business partner at Berkshire Hathaway. He was chairperson of the Santa Clara County Republican Party (2012-2015) and the California Republican Party’s Initiatives Committee (2013-2019). He contributed to several ballot measure campaigns in the 2000s and 2010s, including campaigns to create the California Citizens Redistricting Commission.[23][24][25]

The second largest donor was the Congressional Leadership Fund, which contributed $5.0 million. The Congressional Leadership Fund is a super PAC that focuses on electing Republicans to the U.S. House of Representatives. The third largest donors—Kevin McCarthy for Congress and Thomas M. Siebel, Chairman of C3.ai, Inc.—each provided $1.0 million.[18]

Compared to Proposition 50, the three ballot measures that created (Proposition 11), expanded (Proposition 20), and sought to repeal (Proposition 27) the Citizens Redistricting Commission drew a combined $39.5 million in campaign contributions from supporters and opponents.

Changes to congressional districts
Congressional district maps
California has 52 congressional districts, with voters within each district electing a member of the U.S. House of Representatives. On August 21, 2025, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed Assembly Bill 604 (AB 604), which provided for new congressional district boundaries for California. However, AB 604 cannot take effect without voter approval of Proposition 50.[26] Redistricting Partners, LLC, based in Sacramento, California, drafted the congressional district map that the legislature adopted.[27][28]

The following maps compare the state’s existing congressional districts with the proposed congressional districts that would be established should voters approve Proposition 50. The maps show the partisan lean of districts based on results from the most recent presidential election. Hover over a district to view specific vote percentages. …

Text of measure

Ballot title
The official ballot title is as follows:

“Authorizes Temporary Changes to Congressional District Maps in Response to Texas’ Partisan Redistricting. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.”
Ballot summary

The official ballot summary is as follows:

“ In response to Texas’ mid-decade partisan congressional redistricting, this measure temporarily requires new congressional district maps, as passed by the Legislature in August 2025, to be used in California’s congressional elections through 2030.
Retains California’s independent Citizens Redistricting Commission and directs the Commission to resume enacting congressional district maps in 2031 after the 2030 census and every ten years thereafter.
Establishes state policy supporting use of fair, independent, and nonpartisan redistricting commissions nationwide.”

Fiscal impact statement
The legislative analyst’s fiscal impact statement is as follows:

“One-time costs to counties of up to a few million dollars statewide. County costs would be to update election materials to reflect new congressional district maps.”

Constitutional changes

The ballot measure would add a Section 4 to Article XXI of the California Constitution. The following underlined text would be added:[1]

SEC. 4. (a) It is the policy of the State of California to support the use of fair, independent, and nonpartisan redistricting commissions nationwide. The people of the State of California call on the Congress of the United States to pass federal legislation and propose an amendment of the United States Constitution to require the use of fair, independent, and nonpartisan redistricting commissions nationwide.

(b) In response to the congressional redistricting in Texas in 2025, and notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution or existing law, the single-member districts for Congress reflected in Assembly Bill 604 of the 2025–26 Regular Session pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 21400) of Division 21 of the Elections Code shall temporarily be used for every congressional election for a term of office commencing on or after the date this subdivision becomes operative and before the certification of new congressional boundary lines drawn by the Citizens Redistricting Commission pursuant to subdivision (d).

(c) (1) The Attorney General has the sole legal standing to defend any action regarding a congressional district map adopted pursuant to subdivision (b).

(2) The California Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction in all proceedings in which a congressional district map adopted pursuant to subdivision (b) is challenged.

(d) The Citizens Redistricting Commission established pursuant to Section 1 shall continue to adjust the boundary lines of the congressional, State Senatorial, Assembly, and Board of Equalization districts in conformance with the standards and process set forth in Section 2 in 2031, and every 10 years thereafter as provided in Section 1.

[See Ballotpedia for more, such as Comparison of existing and proposed congressional districts,  etc]