Predictably, the state legislators representing San Bernardino County have more or less divided up along party lines in their reaction to Governor Gavin Newsom’s effort to counter Republican Party efforts to strengthen its presence in Congress following the 2026 midterm election using reciprocal tactics to boost the Democrats’ hold over the California Congressional delegation.
Going back to 1900, with some exceptions, a president coming into office has commonly enjoyed the parallel support of his party having a majority in one or both houses of Congress. Throughout that time, again with a handful of exceptions, it has also been the case that the president’s party will lose ground in or control over one or both the House of Representatives and/or the U.S. Senate as a result of the midterm elections.
In the case of Donald Trump during his current term, one which follows by our years his first term from 2017 until 2021 and which was followed by his absence from the White House following his defeat in the 2020 election, his Republican Party is enjoying a relatively narrow margin of ascendency over the Democrats in Congress, with the GOP-to-Democrat ratio in the House of Representatives standing at 220-to-215 and in the U.S. Senate 53-to-45, with two Independents. Among senior Republicans and Trump Administration advisors there is concern that the Republicans might see their legislative branch edge eradicated in the mid-term 2026 election.
While political maps throughout all 50 states are traditionally redrawn the year following the decennial census, that being the year each decade ending in 1, and are first employed in the year ending in 2, President Trump’s advisors earlier this year hit upon a strategy of asking the governors and legislatures in those states where the Republicans currently predominate to consider making what are generally unprecedented efforts to redraw their respective state’s Congressional electoral maps in such a way as to boost Republican Congressional candidates’ collective chances in 2026.
The manipulation of an electoral constituency’s boundaries so as to rebalance the comparative numbers of voters residing and voting therein in favor of one party or class is called gerrymandering. Gerrymandering can consist of so-called “cracking,” which entails (diluting the voting power of the opposing party’s registrants across multiple districts or what is referred to as “packing,” which involves concentrating the opposing party’s voting power in one district to reduce their voting power in other districts. The overall goal is to increase the hold the controlling party already enjoys within a given jurisdiction. For gerrymandering to take place, the party doing the electoral district map manipulation must, generally, already enjoy at least a slight electoral advantage over the rival party, as the authority for setting or altering political boundaries and electoral maps resides with a state governor or legislature or combination thereof.
Newsom’ and California Democrats were set off on their ongoing gerrymandering mission by a reciprocal gerrymander orchestrated in the Lone Star State earlier this summer. Upon taking office in January, President Donald Trump initiated a whirlwind of policy changes which, while pleasing to his base, generated controversy and provided Democrats and other Trump critics with ammunition to attack him. This sparked concern over the prospect that the relatively slim margin of majority that the GOP holds in the House of Representatives and in the U.S. Senate could evaporate and be reversed in the mid-term 2026 election. Texas Governor Greg Abbott and the lion’s share of Republicans in the Texas legislature, where the Republicans hold a commanding majority, responded positively to that proposal and used the authority vested in that state’s legislature, to redraft the state’s Congressional map in such a way that all of Texas’s existing Republican Congress members are likely to hang onto their elected positions and up to five of the state’s Democratic members of the House of Representatives will lose theirs.
Newsom, who has emerged as one of President Trump’s most steadfast critics, outraged at the barefaced manipulation of the electoral process that Abbot, his Teas counterpart, was engaged in, huddled with Democratic state officials in Sacramento, where Democrats are every bit as dominant as Republican are in Austin, and concocted a plan that includes a new Congressional electoral map for California that matches the scope of political rearrangement taking place in Texas.
On August 19, Democrats in the California Assembly and Senate election committees approved sending a bill to the floor which, they said, would “empower voters to fight back against Trump’s attacks on California. That legislation, which the Democrats dubbed the “Election Rigging Response Act,” a package of bills that included placing a ballot measure before the voters in November calling upon them to approve a new statewide Congressional voting district map. .
“Today, Democrats in the Assembly and Legislature voted to pass a historic measure that empowers California voters to push back against Donald Trump’s power grab in Texas,” Governor Newsom said.
The special election to be held on November 4 at which the state’s voters will be asked to approve or reject Proposition 50, California Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas said on August 21, as the legislature moved to put the matter on the ballot, will give “California voters… the final decision to fight back against Trump’s attacks on their state economy and democracy. I’m proud to stand with my Democratic colleagues today as we pass this historic measure.” Democrats are merely standing up against the Republican oppressors, Rivas said, “with courage. President Trump wants us to be intimidated. His playbook is simple: bully, threaten, silence — then rig the rules to hang onto power. Well, we are here today because California will not be a bystander to that power grab. We are acting — openly, lawfully with purpose and resolve, to defend our state and our democracy. Donald Trump does not believe in democracy. He is terrified of losing — and he will do whatever it takes to cling to power. If Trump can’t win fairly, he’ll try to make it impossible for Republicans to lose.”
Governor Newsom said that what the Democrats are doing is “fighting fire with fire.”
That clashed with what some of the state’s Republicans had to say.
California Assembly Minority Leader James Gallagher said, “No public hearings. No transparency. Complete secrecy. Gavin Newsom’s Democrat allies are behind closed doors, rigging California’s congressional districts so politicians can choose their own voters. The special election would attempt to reverse a constitutional amendment passed by voters in 2010. That amendment stripped the Legislature of its power to draw congressional districts and gave that authority to the Citizens Redistricting Commission, an independent body created to stop politicians from rigging maps to protect themselves. These are rigged maps drawn in secret to give Democrat politicians more power. These maps shred the fair, transparent process voters demanded. The independent commission spent months gathering public input, holding 196 public meetings, hearing 3,870 verbal comments and collecting 32,410 written submissions before finalizing the current maps. Democrat politicians are throwing that work in the trash for a rigged scheme cooked up behind closed doors. This is a mockery of democracy,” Gallagher said. “If they can neuter the commission here, they can neuter it anywhere. Californians should choose their representatives, not the other way around.”
Had the situation been different, Governor Newsom and the Democrats legislators in Sacramento, who comprise supermajorities in both the Assembly and State Senate, would have acted to redraw and approve the new electoral map unilaterally. That was not possible, however. In 2010, California’s voters passed Proposition 20, which transferred congressional redistricting authority in the Golden State from the California State Legislature and the governor, which formerly allowed unbridled gerrymandering that favored whichever party happened to be in control in Sacramento at the time to occur, to a somewhat less-partisan California Citizens Redistricting Commission. That lessened, to a degree, the blatant manipulation of the election district maps in California, though, given the higher Democrat-to-Republican ratio in California generally, the maps drawn since then, particularly the districts created in 2021, give the Democrats an edge. One of the provisions of Proposition 20 was that if the governor or legislature want to reassume redistricting authority, any redistricting they engage in must be approved by the state’s voters.
At present, Democrats lopsidedly outnumber Republicans in California’s 52-member Congressional delegation 43-to-9. That is a reflection of the degree to which California leans leftward politically.
Of California’s total 23,206,519 registered voters, 10,396,792 or 44.8 percent are Democrats, while 5,896,203 or 25.41 percent are Republicans. Those who have no party affiliation number 5,336,441 or 23 percent, a number not terribly far off from that of the Republicans. The remaining 1,577,083 voters or 6.8 percent are members of the American Independent, Green, Libertarian, Peace & Freedom or other more obscure parties. Despite comprising more than one-quarter of the state’s voters, the Republicans hold nine of the total 52 House seats in California’s congressional delegation, while the Democrats claim 43. In this way, California’s electoral map has already been set so that the Republicans are represented at a rate in the House of Representatives – 17.31 percent – well below the 25.41 percent of the voters they constitute.
Thus, there is a widespread perception that the current California Congressional map, which was drawn up in 2021 based upon the 2020 U.S. Census’s survey of California’s population, has already been gerrymandered in favor of the Democratic Party. Mathematically, according to statisticians, based solely on the voter registration numbers throughout the state under the conventional model of a two-party political system that has prevailed in the United States for most of its history, 31 to 33 of the 52 members of California’s Congressional delegation would be Democrats and 21 or 19 of them would be Republicans if the state’s Congressional electoral map were unhindered by gerrymandering.
What Newsom and his fellow and sister Democrats in California appear to be intent upon doing is to bend the Democratic-to-Republican ratio in the California Congressional Delegation even further in favor of the Party of Andrew Jackson. The map which was drawn up and which California’s voters will be asked to certify on November 5 has been contoured in such a way, the Democrats calculate that Doug LaMalfa, the Republican incumbent in California’s 1st Congressional District, incumbent Republican Representative Kevin Kiley in the 3rd Congressional District, incumbent Republican Congressman David Valadao in the 22nd Congressional District, incumbent Republican Representative Ken Calvert in the 41st Congressional District and incumbent Representative Darrell Issa in the 48th Congressional District will most likely be ousted in the face of challenges from their Democratic opponents in the November 2026 election.
The Sentinel this week sought to obtain the perspectives of the 18 members of the California legislature who represent San Bernardino County in Sacramento. Most, but not all cooperated and offered a response to the Sentinel’s inquiries. Some of those who did not respond maintained that a state elected official going on the record with regard to what they referred to as an “electoral” matter would be an ethical violation. Not all of the Assembly or State Senate members felt that way. A few, such as Republican Assemblyman Tom Lackey, who is to be termed out of the legislature following the current term, appeared to be reluctant to offer a statement to any individual who was not one of his constituents within the 34th Assembly District.
Others, such as Democratic Assemblywoman Castillo as perhaps was the case with Lackey, were unwilling to enunciate opposition to the direction being charted by the state’s Democratic majority out of a concern that an expression of opposition might complicate their future personal political initiatives and agendas.
In most cases, however, San Bernardino County’s politicians did not shy away from closing ranks with the members of their respective parties.
18th District Senator Steve Padilla, a Democrat, was unwilling to deal with the controversy of taking a position on Proposition 50.
District 23 State Senator Suzette Martinez Valladares, a Republican, on August 14 stated that she believed that the redistricting mid-decade would “disregard the voters’ mandate for a fair and transparent process. California has a voter-mandated, non-partisan redistricting method that is intended to ensure a fair and transparent process and is enshrined in the California Constitution. Not a concern for Governor Newsom! He is moving full speed with his politically motivated plan to upend that process with biased lines drawn behind closed doors by politicians and political consultants. That’s not leadership, that’s voter betrayal.”
On August 21, Valladares said, “Today, California’s majority party rammed through Governor Newsom’s unconstitutional redistricting maps. In doing so, they ignored our Constitution and stripped power away from the independent, voter-approved Citizens Redistricting Commission.
“I offered a simple amendment: if politicians want to overturn the rules and draw their own districts, then they should live by the same standard as the commissioners — a 10-year ban on running for office. It failed on a straight party-line vote. That tells you everything. This is a blatant power grab — politicians protecting themselves at the expense of voters. But we will not stop, we will continue to fight this abuse. Californians deserve fair maps, transparent elections, and leaders who respect the will of the people. We won’t give up that fight,” Senator Valladares said.
Thereafter, Valladares introduced an amendment to Proposition 50 that called for a 10-year moratorium on running for office for any legislator who votes in favor putting Proposition 50 on the ballot. “If we are going to move forward with a law that takes redistricting power out of the hands of the voter-approved commission, then at the very least, we must put up meaningful safeguards against corruption,” said Valladares.
The proposed amendment would prohibit any member of the Legislature who votes in favor of Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8 from running for elected office for ten years—a restriction that already applies to the citizens who serve on the existing independent redistricting commission.
“This amendment simply extends to every legislator who votes in favor of the measure, the same ten-year candidacy moratorium that applies to the citizens who currently draw the lines,” Valladares stated. “The people of California deserve ironclad guarantees that those in charge of redistricting aren’t acting in their own self-interest.”
More than 60 percent of California voters supported the creation of the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission, frustrated by gerrymandered maps that prioritized political power over community representation.
“Let’s be clear: you cannot in good conscience demand that ordinary citizens forfeit the right to run for office for a decade, and then exempt the politicians now reclaiming that power. There is a word for that—hypocrisy,” Valladares said.
“This is a test of whether this body values integrity over expediency, fairness over partisanship, and accountability over ambition.”
Valladares said she was “calling on fellow lawmakers to join in supporting the amendment and uphold the ethical standards Californians expect and deserve.”
22nd District Senator Susan Rubio indicated she unequivocally supports the governor.
“I was proud to stand alongside my colleagues in the Senate and Assembly and with Governor Gavin Newsom as we signed historic legislation that puts the power back in the hands of Californians. At a time when our communities are under attack from unlawful raids, unjust federal cuts, and nationwide efforts to silence voters, California is standing strong. These powerful measures will ensure that redistricting of our congressional seats will be decided by the people, not by politicians or partisan interests. We are fighting back and we are protecting what matters most.”
19th District Senator Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh, a Republican, said, “Californians deserve a redistricting process that is fair, transparent, and free from political gamesmanship. Weakening or discarding the independent commission, even temporarily, betrays the trust voters placed in us and undermines the integrity of our democracy. The Citizens Redistricting Commission was created to end decades of political gerrymandering. Rolling back that progress for short-term gain risks undoing years of hard-fought reforms. Californians deserve leaders who will protect the independent system voters demanded and preserve it for generations to come.”
Ochoa Bogh said, “A proposed legislative package would place a constitutional amendment on the November 4 special‑election ballot. If passed, the amendment would strip the commission’s authority, temporarily granting lawmakers control over congressional redistricting for the 2026, 2028, and 2030 elections. While framed by some as reactive to nationwide redistricting trends, critics warn it compromises California’s voter-approved safeguards and damages its leadership on electoral fairness.”
Ochoa Bogh said what the Democrats are doing “undermines voter trust. The commission was created by voters to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability. Repealing that now would feel like repudiating voter intent. Past systems showed that when legislators control map-making, they shield their own seats. That’s precisely what voters rejected when they established the independent commission. Will lawmakers include safeguards? Are we willingly undoing voter‑approved reforms? Can the people trust the legislature to act with integrity and not self-interest in the process of redistricting?”
Republican 32nd District State Senator Kelly Seyarto said he opposed what he said was “an egregious legislative package to gerrymander California’s congressional districts. California voters are already living under a supermajority that doesn’t reflect the state’s diverse values. Now the governor wants to spend over $200 million on a special election to redraw maps that not only sidelines Republicans, but silences and suppresses independent voters and everyone who isn’t a progressive Democrat. All Californians deserve fair and balanced representation.”
Senator Seyarto questioned how much the redrawing of maps has already cost California taxpayers without their approval, and why lawmakers are prioritizing it during a budget deficit when services are being cut and the real needs of communities are being overlooked. “Despite serious concerns and unanswered questions, Democrats pushed this three-part legislation, Assembly Bills 604, SB 280, and Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8, through in just one week without transparency or clarity about the legality and validity of the proposed maps.”
District 31 Senator Sabrina Cervantes made clear that she was in favor to the redistricting. Proposition 5, she said, was California’s efforts to “combat a political power grab by President Trump and his Administration in collaboration with the Texas Governor.”
District 25 Senator Sasha Renée Pérez, a Democrat who has been sharply critical of the Trump Administration with regard to a host of issues, was unwilling to go on the record as supporting Governor Newsom’s gerrymandering strategy largely because doing so might clash with her condemnation of reciprocal Republican-led gerrymandering moves, including the one in Texas.
According to Assemblyman Phillip Chen’s Sacramento office, he has taken no position with regard to the ballot measure. He is a Republican.
36th District Assemblyman Jeff Gonzalez, a Republican, in his statement to the Sentinel called Proposition 50 “the supermajority’s redistricting power grab. The August 21 vote on the Assembly floor is nothing short of a disgrace. Instead of tackling affordability, homelessness, healthcare, or the housing crisis, Sacramento is going to waste over $200 million to undo what Californians already decided: that politicians should not be allowed to draw their own district lines. Meanwhile, my constituents in Imperial, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties are struggling. And yet, this body is more interested in gerrymandering than solving real problems. Californians in my district tell me every day they feel forgotten and they’re right. We should be investing in hospitals, food banks, wildfire protection and jobs, not playing partisan games.”
District 39 Assemblyman Juan Carrillo, a Democrat, indicated he viewed the special election to be held this November positively, saying it was “giving voters the opportunity to defend the state against attacks from President Trump. The president created this emergency when he called Texas to ask the governor to change the rules and redraw the districts. His goal is to manipulate the elections. California is not going to sit idly by while they attack our democracy.
Carrillo added, “What Republicans in Texas and other states are doing with redistricting maps is fragmenting communities and eroding public trust. Legislators are drawing maps in secret, leaving voters out of the process. California is taking a different path. The legislation from the leaders of the Assembly and Senate supports the independence of the redistricting commission, defends voting rights protections, and maintains the integrity of California’s cities and neighborhoods. State lawmakers understand the damage that California will continue to face if Trump’s power goes unchecked. Democrats are taking urgent measures to protect the state from his relentless attacks.
41st District Assemblyman John Harabedian appeared to be reluctant to stand foursquare behind his party colleagues in support of Proposition 50, as his office did not respond to the Sentinel in its effort to obtain his take on the matter.
District 45 Assemblyman James Ramos, a Democrat, offered no particular show of sentiment with regard to Proposition 50, but decried efforts by Republicans to engage in what he characterized the “exploitation” of Native Americans by the Republicans in opposing it.
Democrat District 53 Assemblywoman Michelle Rodriguez spurned an invitation from the Sentinel to go on record with regard to Proposition 50.
While District 50 Assemblyman Robert Garcia, the assistant majority leader in California’s lower legislative house has consistently gone along with his party right down the line on virtually every item that comes before the Assembly, he has yet to make a formal statement with regard to the redistricting contained in Proposition 50
District 47 Assemblyman Greg Wallis, a Republican, told the Sentinel, ““Prop 50 is a step backward for democracy. Voters created the independent redistricting commission to take politics out of the process and ensure fair maps. Suspending it now would hand power back to politicians and weaken the will of the people. Californians deserve districts drawn by voters, not by politicians.”
