During the time period under study (pre-Columbian to Civil War/Reconstruction), most Americans (people living in the U.S.) were not eligible to vote: women, Black slaves, Native Americans, and other minorities. So take the opportunity this November to vote!
College students have some of the lowest voter participation rates–let’s work on that. If you are eligible to vote, make sure to register to vote: https://registertovote.ca.gov/Links to an external site.
Now, get educated on Proposition 50 and Vote, see: https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Proposition?number=50&year=202Links to an external site.If you are not eligible to vote, you can still advocate for issues/candidates you feel represent your interests, so still complete this assignment.
Open up any newspaper, hard copy or even online, and you will find an op-ed section. Below are two op-ed articles focused on Proposition 50 published in The San Diego Union-Tribune Op-Ed Section on Monday, September 29, 2025.
FAIR TO WHOM?Prop. 50 disenfranchises East County voters
After more than 35 years leading teams and navigating complex industries, I’ve known that leadership must be rooted in integrity.
Public service as an elected official may be rather new for me, but I know this: Protecting the rules of fair representation should matter more than a power grab.
When Californians voted to create the Citizens Redistricting Commission in 2010, we did it with purpose. We understood that fair representation required more than just lines on a map crafted by politicians.
It required honoring the lived realities of regions: their communities and neighborhoods, their infrastructure, their advocacy networks, and their shared needs.
Proposition 50 threatens to undo that progress. It would allow the Legislature to override the independent redistricting process of 2022 and impose a map that fractures communities for short-term political gain. And the proposed map? It’s a blueprint for permanent damage.
Proponents claim this is a “one-time exception.” Let’s be honest: If the Legislature can override the independent commission once, it can do it again. There’s nothing in the language of Proposition 50 that permanently bars future overrides. This isn’t a fix — it’s a test run for politicians to see just how far they can go.
It also means our California Constitution doesn’t really matter. Remember that when politicians campaign on protecting it.
East County, North County and the inland corridor are distinct voices being deliberately dismantled. California’s 48th U.S. House District, represented by Darrell Issa, is a textbook example.
Today, it leans Republican: 42% of voters are registered Republicans, 28% registered Democrats. Under the new maps, the balance would flip — about 39% Democrat to 29% Republican.
How? By removing conservative areas and replacing them with more Democrat-leaning areas. That’s not reform — it’s retaliation, and we are the collateral damage.
San Diego’s East County — Santee, Lakeside, Ramona, Alpine — and the inland corridor up Interstate 15 through Murrieta and Temecula are not coastal enclaves. These communities face different challenges, and our priorities are immensely different.
Yet under Proposition 50, Santee and half of Ramona, Poway and Valley Center would be folded into Rep. Scott Peters’ district. Lakeside, Blossom Valley, Alpine, half of Ramona and El Cajon would be in Rep. Sara Jacobs’ district.
How do these Democrat politicians suddenly become the voice for North and East County? Have they ever driven the 67, 52, 78 or even know what Dudley’s is? Not likely.
But this isn’t just about representation; it’s also about functionality. When a region is split across multiple congressional districts, it doesn’t just lose cohesion — it loses time. Federal projects require coordination, and when you have different representatives with different priorities, even basic infrastructure needs can stall.
Just look at the Tijuana sewage crisis. It’s a federal issue that’s plagued San Diego’s southern communities and our coastline for years. We had a Democratic president, a Democratic governor and mostly Democratic representatives in the region — and still, nothing happened. It wasn’t until 2025, when Republicans and Democrats at the federal, state and local levels worked together, that we saw real movement. That’s not a partisan critique — it’s a reality check.
More Democrats in power didn’t equal more efficiency. What mattered was coordinated representation and shared urgency.
Like previous state ballot measures, Proposition 50 uses title-washing tactics. I’ve read the language of the ballot measure and who wouldn’t want to “protect democracy”? That’s part of the ballot title voters may read. But the content, murky and misleading, is designed to trick Californians into voting for a power grab.
I’ve reviewed the partisan messaging and there is no doubt a lot of money will be spent to influence your vote in November. My hope is that just as we had common-sense bipartisan support for measures like the recent Proposition 36 crime-reduction law, communities will rally together and reject a politically motivated gerrymandered map that fractures oversight and undermines the very communities it claims to represent.
I urge all Californians to vote “no” on Proposition 50.
Koval is a Santee City Council member.
Prop. 50 lets Californians counter abuse of powerAs a former California redistricting commissioner, I have witnessed firsthand the careful, deliberate and transparent process that drew our congressional lines to reflect the real people of our state. The work was not easy, but it was honorable — and it safeguarded the principle that every community deserves fair representation.
Which is why I am both alarmed and deeply disappointed at the way conversations around Proposition 50, California’s mid-cycle redistricting measure, have often been reduced to a single, shallow question: “What will it cost?”
Yes, this special election carries a financial cost. But if we view it only through dollars and cents, we ignore the greater risks. An estimated 3.4 million Californians stand to lose health care coverage due to Medicaid cuts, and another 3.1 million people — children, veterans and families — face the loss of vital nutrition assistance through SNAP. There are measurable consequences of this moment that will reshape the health and stability of our state, while steadily eroding the foundations of our democracy.
We cannot ignore the reality that this year’s map redrawing in Texas and other states, at President Trump’s urging, has been widely challenged as racial gerrymandering. This continues a generational pattern in many states where lines are drawn to weaken Black, brown, immigrant and working-class voices so politicians can pick their voters.
The Constitution is clear: The role of Congress is to make laws and act as a check and balance to the executive branch. But the Republican-led Congress has failed to fulfill that role. Instead of standing as a safeguard, Congress has abdicated its responsibility and has been a rubber stamp for the president’s unconstitutional whims.
The burden for checking this abuse of power has now shifted to the states and to the people themselves. That is why California must do everything within its power to counter this. Midterm redistricting is a moral necessity. We need to pass Proposition 50 and do what we can to hold the line.
The real cost of inaction shows up when children go hungry because their communities are drawn out of political power and their needs are ignored.
The real cost shows up when generations of struggle for fair representation are erased by a pen stroke that divides neighborhoods and dissolves communities of interest.
And ultimately, the greatest cost is borne by our democracy itself. If we refuse to act because we are afraid of the dollar amount for a special election, then we are complicit in paying a far higher price in human dignity and democratic erosion.
Serving as a redistricting commissioner meant listening to thousands of Californians: parents, farmworkers, business owners, pastors, students, seniors and more. They shared stories of who they are and how their communities function, from the Central Valley to the coast, from urban cities to rural towns.
We honored the state Voting Rights Act, respected communities of interest and built maps in the open for everyone to see. It was democracy in action. It was Californians proving that transparent redistricting is not only possible but necessary.
Now, faced with deliberate racial gerrymandering in other states and unchecked executive overreach, California must respond with equal determination.
Democracy is never free. Every generation is asked to invest something in its survival. But the question before us is not whether midterm redistricting is expensive. The question is whether we will further enable the unchecked cost of inhumane laws, unconstitutional abuses and far-reaching executive orders affecting ordinary Californians.
It is shortsighted for Californians to think only about California at this moment. To stand by and allow more of the same is to surrender to authoritarianism in slow motion. The safeguards we once believed would protect us simply aren’t holding.
Now is not the time for neutrality. If reversing course is what it takes to protect representation, equity and democracy itself, then we must act.
The price of justice will always be less than the price of injustice. That is the truth we must remember before we decide what “cost” really means. It is why I urge every voting-age Californian to back Proposition 50, so we can temporarily set aside the 2020 congressional maps and do our part to stand against authoritarian overreach.
Turner served on the California Citizens Redistricting Commission in 2020. This essay was written for CalMatters.
You will write your own op-ed article in support (yes) or opposition (no) on Proposition 50. You must cite your evidence in your 2-paragraph short essay. Include an interesting title for your essay and please note the class AI policy: Students may use artificial intelligence (AI) programs to revise and refine their writing; however, all course assignments will be created by the student and not AI generated. Students will describe and cite AI when utilizing it in our course.
AI generated assignments will achieve a failing grade. Please include an MLA citiation if you utilize AI with the following format:
“Text of prompt” prompt. ChatGPT, Day Month version, OpenAI, Day Month Year, chat.openai.com. Source: https://guides.lib.purdue.edu/c.php?g=1371380&p=1013507Links to an external site.
This assignment aligns with student learning objective 7 and the section on: "Compare and contrast the arguments of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists, relating their arguments to the rise of the first two party systems and to current American politics." Think about the Democrat and Republican party today and previous module content. Which party embraces Federalist ideas? Which party embraces Anti-Federalist ideas?