In their own words: Gov. Newsom, Rep. Pete Aguilar discuss Prop. 50 | Opinion
On Tuesday, Sacramento Bee politics reporters and members of The California McClatchy Editorial Board, representing The Sacramento Bee, Fresno Bee, San Luis Obispo Tribune and Modesto Bee, met with Gov. Gavin Newsom and House Democratic Caucus Chair and San Bernardino Rep. Pete Aguilar to discuss Proposition 50.
A highly contentious constitutional amendment, Prop. 50 is the only issue on the Nov. 4 ballot in a special election that proposes temporary, legislature-drawn congressional district maps for 2026 through 2030, in response to partisan redistricting efforts in other states, specifically in Texas.
Also present were 2020 Citizens Redistricting Commissioner, political scientist and Pomona College Prof. Sara Sadhwani; and Political Analyst Paul Mitchell, whose firm, Redistricting Partners, drafted the proposed maps that California voters are being asked to adopt.
The following interview has been edited for length and clarity. Questions asked by McClatchy opinion journalists are labeled “Editorial Board.” Questions asked by Sacramento Bee news reporters are labeled “Sacramento Bee.”
Editorial Board: The No on Prop. 50 campaign argues that, instead of “cheating,” Democrats should simply create a platform that would appeal to most voters and win elections. How would you respond to that?
Gov. Gavin Newsom: We’re responding to what happened in Texas. This is a direct response to the attack on next year’s midterm by the president of the United States, who, as you know, dialed up the governor of Texas and said he needed five seats. Then, he ultimately said he was “entitled” to five seats. We’re simply responding to the effort by the president to rig the election, and we’re doing it, I think, in a deeply responsible way.
And we’re doing it in a temporary way: We’re maintaining the Independent Redistricting Commission. We’re doing it in a very transparent way: The maps went through a legislative process that were put on the ballot. Ultimately, we’re asking the voters to decide. After this temporary process that will unfold in ’26, ’28 and ’30, we will go back to our original form.
Sacramento Bee: Polling has barely cracked 50%. You have framed this as an existential threat to the country. What happens if Prop. 50 doesn’t pass? What’s the backup plan?
Newsom: Failure is not an option. We’re doing everything we can and must to succeed, and I believe we will succeed because the people of this state understand what’s at stake. Every day, the president of the United States is putting a stake through the heart of our founding fathers and those enduring values that many of us have taken for granted for 249 years. This is a profoundly consequential moment in our Republic, and it requires consequential action. You’ve seen the number of individuals that have contributed to this campaign. It’s an unprecedented organization that’s been built in a very short period of time.
Rep. Pete Aguilar: This measure has to be successful. We are here because House Republicans currently have a three seat majority. Oh, by the way, that’s the same number of seats that they redistricted out of North Carolina just a couple years ago. So we’re here because they continue to go down this path where they can only win if they change the rules of the game. Everything is at stake, so failure isn’t an option.
Sacramento Bee: But there’s a difference between monetary support and endorsements versus what people are feeling on the ground. Do you think they will make up that ground in the next few weeks?
Aguilar: I think it would be more appropriate to ask the “no” side if they’re going to make up ground. They’re polling at 36%, 39%, 42%. In order for them to be successful, they have to go a long, long way. So I think we’re in good shape.
Sacramento Bee: You mentioned that other states are doing this, including Missouri. If one of those states is successful and flips even one seat, do you fear that you’re changing and lowering the standards of California redistricting for nothing?
Newsom: I think the opposite. It only reinforces the imperative of what we’re doing. Donald Trump is weakness masquerading as strength. He knows he’s going to lose the midterm election, and he knows that, finally, there will be a co-equal branch of government. That’s an existential threat, because, de facto, the Trump presidency ends next November with Speaker-elect (Hakeem Jeffries). Sure, there’ll be fire and fury. I don’t want to overstate that, but you cannot understate the stakes and the recognition that the president himself has about what’s at stake.
Sacramento Bee: What would you say to those who feel that you are advocating redistricting at a time or at the expense of other perhaps more pressing issues to Californians, like fire recovery, affordability, homelessness.
Newsom: We are tackling (those issues) in unprecedented ways, from housing that was linked to the budget this year and the most significant permitting reforms in our state’s history; the work we’re doing on homelessness and the full implementation of Prop. 1; the work we’re doing on Care Court and conservatorship reform; the work we’re doing with encampment resolution grants and new strategies around accountability on housing; and myriad bills I’ve been signing in real time, including dozens today on artificial intelligence and other major issues.
Donald Trump is holding hostage $39 billion that we’ve requested to help people in Los Angeles recover from one of the most devastating wildfires in U.S. history because he doesn’t like our politics. That is exactly what redistricting ultimately represents: This notion of popular sovereignty, co-equal branches of government and the rule of law. Not the rule of Don.
Editorial Board: Have you done the math, given that more states are looking at gerrymandering, to see if Democrats can retake the house?
Aguilar: Yes, Democrats can take back the House. We have to take back the House. We don’t want to wake up in February and be 14 seats down. So we are punching back, and that’s why we are in the courts — we’re litigating efforts that Republicans are undertaking now.
Sacramento Bee: The Democrats also ran on this message back in 2024 about safeguarding the state of democracy. What makes you think that it will work this time?
Newsom: When I called the special session to — in your words, not mine — “Trump-proof” California, folks said, “Boy, he seems a little hyperbolic.” Now, we look a little timid in hindsight. I don’t know what more evidence you need than listening to the president assert that he somehow has the authority to utilize the U.S. military for domestic policing as a training ground.
Sacramento Bee: Is it fair to say that you are kind of saying “I told you so?”
Newsom: Not that. Everybody talks about focusing on the kitchen table issues. There are no kitchen tables when he’s burning down the house. Everyone needs to wake up to what the hell is going on. So with all due respect to the “no” side on this, hell no, we’re not going to sit back and watch this democracy — this republic — get destroyed because they expected us to “Go high when they go low.” We’re fighting back, and not with two hands behind our back. We’re doing it in the court of law, we’re exercising our moral authority every single day, using our bully pulpit and our communication strategies, but we’re also using our formal authority here by asking we, the people in our state of California, to make this decision — not politicians like they did in Texas, not maps that were designed in Mar-a-Lago, but maps that are in front of the voters. They’ll have the determination, they’ll have the ability to make this determination for themselves in a democratic way.
Prof. Sara Sadhwani: If we think that President Trump asking Texas to find him five seats is the first time that he has attempted to rig an election, then we all have amnesia, because he did the same thing in the state of Georgia in 2020 asking Brad Raffensperger to find him 12,000 votes; he intimidated Al Schmidt, the Republican elections commissioner in the state of Pennsylvania. In those instances, those Republicans were willing to stand up to him, and that is the sign of a vibrant democracy when a party is willing to check a president. We’re not seeing that now..
Editorial Board: Are you standing by the assertion that there is no scenario that you would support an extension of Prop. 50 in 2032?
Newsom: I’m firm in that resolve.
Sacramento Bee: What do you make of the fact that other blue state governors have said that they are considering this, but haven’t really followed your lead?
Newsom: We can control what we can control. There are a number of other states that I’m hopeful will move. If we’re successful, I think it (could) create some momentum.
Sacramento Bee: Are you running for anything in 2028?
Newsom: I have no thoughts on that, and that’s literally the last thing on my mind.
This story was originally published October 2, 2025 at 5:00 AM with the headline "In their own words: Gov. Newsom, Rep. Pete Aguilar discuss Prop. 50 | Opinion."