Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’

News

Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’
Independent Voter News

The special election for California Prop 50 wraps up November 4 and recent polling shows the odds strongly favor its passage. The measure suspends the state’s independent congressional map for a legislative gerrymander that Princeton grades as one of the worst in the nation.

The Princeton Gerrymandering Project developed a “Redistricting Report Card” that takes metrics of partisan and racial performance data in all 50 states and converts it into a grade for partisan fairness, competitiveness, and geographic features.


The current congressional map in California, drawn by the voter-approved Citizens Redistricting Commission, has an overall “B” grade. The map offered under Prop 50 drops the state to an “F” as 92% of the state’s congressional districts will lean Democrat.

“It’s been called by Princeton University’s gerrymander project one of the two worst gerrymanders in the last 50 years,” said U.S. Rep. Kevin Kiley, whose district is among the 5 currently held by Republicans that will be dramatically changed under Prop 50.

Right now, Kiley’s district is competitive with a score of R+3.8% based on 2024 election results. However, according to data compiled by Ballotpedia, it will change to D+10.2% based on how voters within the new boundaries cast their ballots in the last presidential election.

“Governor Newsom is saying, ‘well, Texas did this and that is a bad gerrymander, but California doing it in response – that’s a good gerrymander,’” Kiley said.

The problem is now we have North Carolina and Missouri that are looking at redistricting to help Republicans. Is that a good gerrymander or bad gerrymander? Then you also have states like Illinois or Maryland or Virginia that are going to redistrict to help Democrats. Is that a good gerrymander or a bad gerrymander?”

He added that “the consequence of this contorted logic is [a] race to the bottom.”

Kiley introduced a bill in August that bans any congressional redistricting until after the 2030 census following actions in Texas and California to push through aggressively partisan gerrymanders. The bill hasn’t moved since its introduction.

To clarify, Texas – which already had an ‘F’ grade from the Princeton Gerrymandering Project – received another ‘F’ for its new map.

Texas acted on demands from President Donald Trump to deliver 5 more seats to Republicans in Congress. Newsom immediately responded with a plan to nullify these gains by circumventing the California Constitution’s ban on legislative and partisan gerrymandering.

Newsom and his allies say they are “fighting fire with fire” and are doing this to defend democracy against what they call Trump’s attempt to rig elections. Newsom recently posted an ad on X featuring prominent Democratic figures, saying Californians can “restore democracy.”

Prop 50 opponents, like Kiley, say “when you fight fire with fire, the whole world burns.”

It is now up to California voters to pass or reject a constitutional amendment that allows a congressional gerrymander to go into effect until the Citizens Redistricting Commission draws new maps in 2031.

Recent polling shows that 62% of California voters support Prop 50 – pointing to the strong likelihood of its passage on November 4 even if the poll isn't perfectly accurate. Prop 50 is the fourth most expensive ballot measure race in California history.

It is the most expensive out of any proposed in an odd-numbered year.


Shawn Griffiths is an election reform expert and National Editor of IVN.us. He studied history and philosophy at the University of North Texas. He joined the IVN team in 2012.

Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’ was originally published by Independent Voter News and is republished with permission.


Read More

With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less
Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

A voter registration drive in Corpus Christi, Texas, on Oct. 5, 2024. The deadline to register to vote for Texas' March 3 primary election is Feb. 2, 2026. Changes to USPS policies may affect whether a voter registration application is processed on time if it's not postmarked by the deadline.

Gabriel Cárdenas for Votebeat

Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

Texans seeking to register to vote or cast a ballot by mail may not want to wait until the last minute, thanks to new guidance from the U.S. Postal Service.

The USPS last month advised that it may not postmark a piece of mail on the same day that it takes possession of it. Postmarks are applied once mail reaches a processing facility, it said, which may not be the same day it’s dropped in a mailbox, for example.

Keep ReadingShow less
Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
People voting at voting booths.

A little-known interstate compact could change how the U.S. elects presidents by 2028, replacing the Electoral College with the national popular vote.

Getty Images, VIEW press

The Quiet Campaign That Could Rewrite the 2028 Election

Most Americans are unaware, but a quiet campaign in states across the country is moving toward one of the biggest changes in presidential elections since the nation was founded.

A movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is happening mostly out of public view and could soon change how the United States picks its president, possibly as early as 2028.

Keep ReadingShow less