California Voters Reject Newsom’s Redistricting Plans Despite Democratic Push

A surprising new poll reveals a significant disconnect between California’s political leadership and its voters on one of the most consequential electoral issues facing the state. While Governor Gavin Newsom and Democratic party leaders push aggressively for legislative control over congressional redistricting, a substantial majority of Californians want to maintain the current independent system—a finding that could derail one of the governor’s most ambitious political initiatives.

The Battle for Electoral Control

The fight over who draws California’s congressional maps represents far more than a procedural debate about governance. At its core, this battle reflects competing visions of democratic representation and political power in America’s most populous state. Governor Newsom’s proposal would temporarily suspend the state’s independent redistricting commission, transferring map-drawing authority back to the Democratic-controlled legislature for the next three election cycles.

This push comes as part of a broader national strategy by Democrats to counter similar efforts in Republican-controlled states, particularly Texas, where GOP lawmakers are pursuing aggressive redistricting that could net the party additional House seats. The timing is critical: with control of the U.S. House hanging in the balance and California’s delegation playing a pivotal role in national politics, the stakes couldn’t be higher.

The independent redistricting commission, established through voter-approved ballot measures in 2008 and 2010, was designed to remove partisan politics from the map-drawing process. The 14-member commission includes five Democrats, five Republicans, and four members with no party preference, all selected through an elaborate screening process intended to identify citizens without conflicts of interest or partisan motivations.

Poll Results Reveal Stark Opposition

The comprehensive POLITICO–Citrin Center–Possibility Lab survey delivers a clear message: California voters overwhelmingly reject the governor’s redistricting gambit. With 64% of registered voters opposing the transfer of power to the legislature and only 36% supporting it, the poll results represent a significant challenge to Newsom’s political calculations.

What makes these findings particularly striking is their consistency across party lines. Rather than reflecting the deep partisan divisions that characterize much of American politics today, opposition to legislative redistricting cuts across traditional political boundaries. Among Republicans, 66% favor keeping the independent commission, while 61% of Democrats share this view—a remarkable display of bipartisan agreement in an era of increasing polarization.

Perhaps most telling is the response from independent voters, who represent a growing share of California’s electorate. A commanding 72% of these unaffiliated voters want to preserve the commission system, with only 28% supporting legislative control. This finding suggests that efforts to frame redistricting as a purely partisan issue may backfire with the very voters who often determine electoral outcomes.

Elite Opinion Diverges from Public Sentiment

While ordinary voters show strong support for maintaining the independent commission, the political elite presents a more complex picture. The poll surveyed “policy influencers”—individuals described as deeply versed in California’s political landscape and likely to shape public opinion and policy decisions.

Among Republican influencers, support for the commission remains overwhelming at 91%, consistent with both party orthodoxy and voter preferences. However, Democratic influencers present a split that mirrors the broader tension within the party: 51% favor transferring authority to the legislature, while 49% want to keep the commission.

This divide among Democratic elites reflects the fundamental tension between principled support for independent governance and tactical considerations about electoral advantage. Many Democratic insiders recognize the theoretical benefits of non-partisan redistricting while simultaneously acknowledging the practical political benefits that could flow from legislative control.

“That surprised me a little bit, given that this is being pushed so heavily by Newsom and by the Democratic Party nationally that we have to combat Texas,” noted Jack Citrin, a veteran political science professor at UC Berkeley who partnered on the poll. His surprise highlights the assumption among many political observers that elite Democratic opinion would more uniformly support the governor’s position.

Historical Context and Voter Skepticism

The poll results gain additional significance when viewed against California’s recent political history. Voters have twice approved ballot measures creating and strengthening the independent redistricting commission, most recently in 2010. These victories weren’t narrow affairs—they reflected broad public support for removing politicians from the map-drawing process.

Professor Citrin emphasizes this historical context: “It’s not surprising, in the sense that California has voted twice for this independent review commission not all that long ago. And there’s a lot of mistrust and cynicism about politicians and the Legislature. That’s reflected here as well.”

This skepticism toward legislative control reflects deeper trends in American politics. Across the country, voters consistently express distrust of political institutions and politicians’ motivations. The independent redistricting commission represents an attempt to address these concerns by creating a buffer between electoral self-interest and map-drawing decisions.

The commission system has generally received positive reviews for producing more competitive districts and reducing partisan gerrymandering compared to the legislative maps that preceded it. While no redistricting process can be entirely free from political considerations, the commission approach has created maps that most observers consider more fair and representative than those produced through partisan legislative processes.

Strategic Calculations and Political Timing

Governor Newsom’s redistricting push reflects careful strategic calculation rather than impulsive political maneuvering. The governor has explicitly tied his proposal to developments in Texas, where Republican lawmakers are pursuing aggressive redistricting that could add five GOP seats to the House delegation. From this perspective, California Democrats face a choice between unilateral disarmament and responding in kind.

The governor has been notably cautious in advancing his proposal, waiting to gauge developments in Texas before fully committing to the California initiative. This hesitancy reflects both political pragmatism and recognition of the potential risks involved. A failed ballot measure could embarrass the governor and strengthen arguments for maintaining the current system.

Newsom’s proposal doesn’t seek to eliminate the commission entirely—a politically untenable position given voter support for the system. Instead, he wants to suspend its work temporarily, allowing legislature-drawn maps for the 2026, 2028, and 2030 elections before returning to the commission system. This more limited approach attempts to balance partisan political needs with respect for voter preferences.

The governor remains confident about his chances despite the challenging poll numbers. “I think the voters will approve it. I think the voters understand what’s at stake,” Newsom said in a recent news conference. “We live in the most un-Trump state in America.” This framing attempts to mobilize anti-Trump sentiment in support of the redistricting change, betting that partisan motivations can overcome institutional preferences.

Internal Polling vs. Public Opinion

The disconnect between public polling and the governor’s confidence reflects different methodological approaches and question framing. Newsom’s internal polling reportedly shows slim majority support for his proposal, with backing increasing when the plan is described in explicitly partisan terms emphasizing the need to counter Republican efforts in other states.

This divergence highlights the importance of how redistricting questions are presented to voters. When framed as a choice between independent and legislative control, voters prefer independence. When framed as a necessary response to Republican gerrymandering, some voters express willingness to support temporary legislative control.

The challenge for redistricting proponents will be convincing voters that the threat from Republican-controlled states justifies abandoning California’s commitment to independent redistricting. This argument requires voters to accept that fighting fire with fire represents the best approach to a national redistricting problem.

Broader Implications and National Context

The California redistricting debate extends far beyond state boundaries, reflecting broader national tensions over electoral fairness and partisan advantage. Democratic strategists view aggressive redistricting by Republican-controlled states as an existential threat to the party’s House prospects, potentially creating a structural advantage that could persist for a decade.

Meanwhile, developments in other states continue to influence California’s calculations. The ongoing standoff in Texas, where Democratic legislators fled the state to prevent a quorum on redistricting legislation, demonstrates the high stakes involved in these battles. An Illinois judge recently declined Texas authorities’ request to prosecute the fleeing Democrats, adding another layer of complexity to the multi-state redistricting drama.

The ultimate resolution of California’s redistricting debate will likely influence similar discussions in other states with independent commissions or considering such reforms. A successful challenge to California’s commission could embolden politicians elsewhere to seek greater control over redistricting processes.

Looking Ahead: Political Challenges and Opportunities

With new maps expected to be released shortly and the governor preparing to launch his redistricting push, the coming months will test both Newsom’s political skills and voter commitment to independent governance. The poll results suggest significant challenges ahead for redistricting proponents.

“If this is the starting point, then they will have a struggle,” Professor Citrin observed, noting the substantial gap between current public opinion and the support needed for ballot measure success. Overcoming a nearly 30-point deficit in voter support represents a formidable political challenge, even for a popular governor in a heavily Democratic state.

The debate will likely center on competing narratives about fairness, representation, and political strategy. Redistricting proponents will emphasize the need to respond to Republican gerrymandering and protect Democratic representation in Congress. Opponents will stress the importance of maintaining independent institutions and honoring previous voter decisions.

Ultimately, the redistricting debate reflects fundamental questions about how democratic societies should balance competing values of fairness, representation, and political effectiveness. California voters will soon decide whether temporary partisan advantage justifies abandoning their commitment to independent redistricting—a choice with implications extending far beyond the Golden State’s borders.