Support For Prop 50 Split Along Party Lines In Riverside County

Ballot drop boxes are now open across Riverside County for the November 4 special election, in which voters will decide whether to allow state lawmakers to redraw congressional districts across California.

“Californians have been uniquely targeted by the Trump Administration, and thanks to the hard work of the California legislature, they will have a choice to fight back — and bring much needed accountability to Trump’s efforts to undermine the democratic process,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a press release announcing Proposition 50, also known as the Election Rigging Response Act.

Support for the measure has been largely split along party lines, with Republicans saying the effort undermines the authority of the independent, citizen-led redistricting commission and Democrats saying that it would level the playing field in Congress. That partisan divide remains true across Riverside County.

“The Republican Party of Riverside County stands in firm opposition to Proposition 50,” Riverside County Republican Party (RCRP) Chair Lori Stone said in an email to The Riverside Record. “This measure is Gavin Newsom’s undemocratic power grab and a clear example of partisan gerrymandering carried out in broad daylight.”

Stone, who is also a member of the Murrieta City Council, said the proposed maps were an attack on voter choice and would take away power from the people of Riverside County.

“Proposition 50 is designed to target Republican members of Congress here in California,” she said. “The Democrats could not defeat our candidates at the ballot box, so now they are trying to change the rules by redrawing the lines.”

However, Riverside County Democratic Party (RCDP) Chair Joy Silver said the measure was necessary to allow the state to move forward with its plans to temporarily adopt legislatively redrawn maps to balance out the impact of Texas’ mid-cycle redistricting effort.

“It’s particularly important to the Riverside County Democratic Party, because it does give us another Democrat that will represent us here,” she said. “But what’s most important is that passing Prop 50 allows us to pull the trigger on redistricting.”

If voters approve the proposition, the new maps would likely result in the flipping of five of the state’s 52 congressional districts from Republican to Democrat, according to an analysis by the nonprofit Ballotpedia.

Changing the electoral landscape across Riverside County

Voters in the county are currently split between six congressional districts, represented by three Democrats and three Republicans. 

The 25th District, represented by Dr. Raul Ruiz (D-Indio), includes the Eastern Coachella Valley, and the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Blythe, Hemet and San Jacinto. The 35th District, represented by Norma Torres (D-Pomona) includes the city of Eastvale. The 39th District, represented by Mark Takano (D-Riverside), includes the cities of Riverside, Moreno Valley, Jurupa Valley and Perris.

Takano, whose district is fully within the county and would change very little if the new maps are approved, said he fully supported the effort.

“[President] Donald Trump and Republican governors are doing exactly what voters in California wanted to stop,” Takano, who currently has no registered challengers for 2026, said in an interview with The Riverside Record. “But the interest of California is not being served if we do the right thing and every other state that is controlled by Republicans is able to do the expedient wrong thing, which is to manipulate and rig the elections so they win no matter what.”

The 40th District, represented by Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills), includes parts of Corona. The 41st District, represented by Ken Calvert (R-Corona), includes the cities of Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Indian Wells, La Quinta, Lake Elsinore, Menifee, Norco, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, Rancho Mirage, Wildomar, most of Corona, southern Eastvale and western Riverside. The 48th District, represented by Darrell Issa (R-Bonsall), includes the cities of Temecula and Murrieta.

“Gavin Newsom’s partisan gerrymander is an unprecedented power grab that shouldn’t pass the test of voters who already decided to keep politicians like Newsom out of reapportionment,” Jonathan Wilcox, Issa’s communications director, said in an email to The Record. “Congressman Issa supported the initiative to create the independent commission, he believes it is the best arrangement for California, and the state constitution is being trashed by Newsom for pure political advantage.”

Kim, whose district would expand further into the county if voters approve the measure, said in a statement to The Record that the new maps would disenfranchise voters across the state.

“The people of California voted for a transparent, publicly accountable redistricting process, not this ridiculous political circus that will take hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to fund,” she said. “I believe Californians will stand with our citizen-led commission, and reject Proposition 50 in November.”

If voters approve Prop 50 next month, parts of the county would be added to the 23rd District, currently represented by Jay Obernolte (R-Hesperia), and the 33rd District, currently represented by Pete Aguilar (D-Redlands).

The 41st District, which is currently entirely contained within Riverside County, would no longer include any part of the county, with voters from the current district split between the 23rd, 25th, 35th, 40th and 48th districts.

“Under the new gerrymandered maps, Riverside County would see the number of congressional districts fully within the county reduced from two down to just one,” Calvert said in an emailed statement to The Record. “Shrinking the representation of Riverside County in Washington D.C just to protect the re-election of Democrats is not in the best interest of Inland Empire residents.”

Want to see how Prop 50 would impact you? Check out the 2025 voter guide from our friends at CalMatters here.

The challenge of running for office

For some candidates, whether voters approve Prop 50 would have little impact on their campaigns.

“I got into this race to stop Donald Trump’s attacks on our democracy,” Christina Gagnier, a Democrat hoping to unseat Kim, said in a statement to The Record. “This has not changed, and today, I am even more committed to this campaign and holding Trump and the MAGA Republicans in Congress accountable.”

Gagnier said she fully supported the effort, saying that the state needed to fight fire with fire — a common refrain from those who spoke with The Record. Democrat Paula Swift, who is also running to represent the 40th District, said the outcome of the November 4 election would have little to no impact on her campaign.

The same was true for Democrats Whitney Shanahan and Anuj Dixit, who are running to represent the 48th District.

“I ran this race last election cycle,” Shanahan said in a statement to The Record, noting her support for Proposition 50. “And as the top Democrat vote getter in Riverside County, I look forward to running again and taking on Issa in the general.”

Tessa Lynn Hodge, a Democrat running in the 23rd District, also said her strategy wouldn’t change regardless of whether Prop 50 passed.

“My strategy for winning this race was to always show up in the small, overlooked communities in my district that no one ever goes to, that no candidates ever go to, no congressional reps ever go to,” she said in an interview with The Record. “My path to victory was always straight through those small, rural towns like what I grew up in, and that doesn’t change whether the district stays how it is now, or changes if Prop 50 passes.”

Paul Chakalian, a Democrat also running to represent District 23, said that whether he’s running with the new maps or the old maps won’t really make a difference for him either.

“We were pretty much ignored in the redistricting, which, you know, is kind of a good thing, because it could have become, it could have become much more Republican,” he said. “We’re definitely one of the least changed districts in the state.”

But the impacts for those candidates pale in comparison to the few who would be running in completely different districts if voters approve the ballot initiative.

Palm Springs business owner Ferguson Porter, Nuview Union School District Trustee Abel Chavez, Coachella Valley entrepreneur Brandon Riker and Dr. Tiffanie Tate are all Democrats running to represent the 41st District. If Prop 50 passes, all four would live outside the boundaries of the district.

Porter, Chavez and Riker have said they would run to represent the 48th District if the ballot initiative passes. Tate said she would continue to campaign as if nothing has changed.

“My intention is to continue running,” Porter said. “I just have to change course and plot out a new campaign strategy, because now I’ve got a whole new set of voters to talk to and meet with.”

Along with a new set of voters, the new maps would also change the race itself for the candidates.

“If it doesn’t happen, then my primary will, I think, be easier, but my general election will be harder,” Chavez said. “If it does happen, then my primary will be harder, and the general election will be easier.”

Democrat Brandon Riker, knowing that he would be switching districts if the proposition passed, has instead focused his campaign on supporting the ballot initiative.

“That’s how much we believe in this,” he said in an interview with The Record. “We have almost over 400 active volunteers in our campaign, and we are going to do everything we can to get this across the goal line.”

Democrat Curtis Morrison, an immigration attorney running to represent the 48th District, said he would face Issa regardless of the maps, despite what he called a “unique situation.”

“I’m in the race no matter what it is,” he said. “A unique situation is that the new boundary actually takes my home out of the district. I can see that.”

Despite no longer being in the 48th District if Prop 50 were to pass, Morrison said it wouldn’t change his decision to continue running in an attempt to unseat Issa, who he said also does not live in the district.

“In California, the requirement is that you live in the state, and that’s always been fine for Darrell Issa,” Morrison said. “So while I’m not thrilled about the idea that my home is outside the district when I’m running, I think that’s fair game in this particular race.”

The uncertainty caused by the maps was one of the reasons Morrison said he was slow to support Prop 50.

“We’ve basically lost 12 weeks of people getting to know who the candidates are actually going to be, because in this race, there’s a lot of hypothetical candidates,” he said. “There’s at least four that are only running on the new map [if Prop 50 passes], and then there’s one that’s only running on the old map [if Prop 50 fails].”

A response to Texas political maneuvering

For many of those in support of Proposition 50, the fact that the new maps require voter approval before they can go into effect make it different from the partisan mid-decade redistricting effort in Texas that prompted California legislators to act.

“We’re responding to what occurred in Texas,” Newsom previously said of the proposition. “We’re neutralizing what occurred, and we’re giving the American people a fair chance, because when all things are equal, and we’re all playing by the same set of rules, there’s no question that the Republican Party will be the minority party in the House of Representatives next year.”

Stone pushed back against the assertion, calling it disingenuous to point to happenings in other states to justify a proposal that would first and foremost impact California voters.

“There will be a lot of people trying to make Proposition 50 into a national fight, but when that happens our local communities get left behind,” she said. “This measure is not about serving the people of Riverside County, it is about political insiders protecting their own power.”

Silver, however, said that Prop 50 was a national issue since it would impact the ability of Democrats, both voters and elected officials, to have more of a voice in the federal government.

“The opposition is quite loud, and we’re hearing a lot from them, and we hear a lot from them nationally,” she said, speaking of Republicans. “Right now, they have the House, the Senate and the presidency, and there are those who say that certainly they have the Supreme Court, so this is critically important to hearing our voice.”

But for many of those who spoke with The Record, the difference between what’s happening in Texas and what’s happening here in California came down to the process.

“California, the way it’s set up, is allowing the voters to decide if they want to change the maps,” Porter, who was born and raised in Texas, said. “Whereas in Texas, the voters had no say whatsoever, and they are purposefully disenfranchising voters in places like Austin and Houston.”

Esther Kim Varet, a Democrat hoping to unseat Kim, said in a statement to The Record that she supported the measure because it protected California voters from having their voices diluted by “extreme gerrymandering” in other states.

“It ensures our state continues to have a fair say in our nation’s future,” she said. “This is not political parties — it’s about making sure our democracy works for everyone.”

For Chavez, Prop 50 was the only way to counter the electoral imbalance created by Texas’ efforts so it wouldn’t unfairly tilt the scales.

“Even though it is the same thing, in a way, it’s not the same thing, because the people are choosing, it is only temporary,” he said. “At the same time, it’s important to do it, because we’re just rebalancing what they’ve already taken away.”

Dixit, a voting rights attorney, said another way California’s effort differed was that the independent commission remained intact and would redraw the maps after the next Census.

“We are just pausing it for the exigent circumstance that currently exists and and the independent commission will then return after we get through this period,” he said. “We are keeping our integrity here in California, supporting our values, but responding to the exigent circumstance that is before us right now.”

Concerns for the future

For most of the people who spoke with The Record, deciding whether or not to support Prop 50 was not a difficult decision to make.

“We’re watching an opposition that is seeking to have a power that is not ending, nor is it inclusive, nor is it equal, equal nor will we have any equity,” Silver said. “So it’s critically important that Democrats can step forward and be heard and have a balance of power on these critical issues of the nation.”

Despite this, almost all shared concerns about what taking this step might mean for the future of American democracy.

“Proposition 50 is not about fair representation, it is about one politician trying to tilt the scales for his own future,” Stone said, noting that she felt Newsom was throwing out democracy in an effort to bolster his profile ahead of a potential presidential run. “When voters lose the ability to choose their representatives freely, the very foundation of our democracy is at risk.”

But Morrison said there was more at risk if California didn’t take any action in response to redistricting efforts in Texas.

“There are things that are worse than the consequences of gerrymandering,” he said, referencing the Trump administration’s mass deportations. “The courts cannot save us from this with their current makeup, and so we have to take back the House.”

Another concern was the escalating partisanship across the country and how that might play out going forward.

“I see polarization as perhaps the single biggest problem,” Chakalian said. “I mean, it’s that and money in politics are probably the top two that have led to such a broken electoral system and a feeling among so many Americans that they’re not being represented, they’re not being heard.”

“What we’re seeing is historic targeting of various sides, and it really does worry me,” Hodge said. “In so many states like Texas, they’re looking at what is the short-term gain of this? And they are very much not looking whatsoever at what is the long-term outcome of this.”

Some of those impacts are already being seen, Porter said, with states like Missouri and Indiana jumping into the redistricting fray.

“The fact that Indiana and Missouri are engaging in this escalation is troublesome, and frankly, what it highlights, and now it’s bringing this issue [of partisan gerrymandering] to the forefront,” he said.

On the flip side, Porter said the spotlight on partisan gerrymandering could make it easier for Congress to take action and require that all states use independent citizens commissions like California has done since the 2010 Census.

“I think the one bright spot in all this is that now people understand how corrupt and how pervasive partisan gerrymandering is, and not just with Republicans, admittedly, with Democrats in certain places,” he said. “But in this case, it’s so egregiously done by the Republicans that I think it will show people what’s going on.”

Takano said that it was his belief that the passage of Proposition 50 would help build support for a federal law to ban partisan gerrymandering.

“That is what the Democrats stand for, and to make mid-decade redistricting illegal for every state,” he said. “Every state must play by fair rules, and right now that doesn’t exist, but that’s what we aspire to.”

The Riverside Record reached out to all candidates registered to run for office in Congressional Districts 23, 25, 33, 35, 39, 40, 41 and 48 who filed at least one financial report as of June 30, as reported by the Federal Elections Commission. 

Those who didn’t respond to a request for comment included 33rd District Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Redlands), 35th District Rep. Norma Torres (D-Pomona) and Republican candidate Mike Cargile, 25th District Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Indio) and Republican candidates Joe Males and Ceci Truman, 23rd District Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Big Bear Lake), 40th District Democratic candidates Nina Linh and Joseph Kerr and Independent candidate Christian Tyler Ahmed and 48th District Democratic candidate Ammar Campa-Najjar.