The Democrats have failed to quell the fire burning down the principles of the country. In the face of what some political scientists have called a constitutional crisis during Trump’s latest term, the Democratic Party has fought continual abuse of power with words and minimal action. It makes sense. Words are what politicians know, and very few times throughout our recent history have we seen such a blatant disregard for our system of government.
In the last few months, the Trump administration has barred news outlets from entering the Capitol Building, deployed the National Guard to major cities, ignored the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review, deported immigrants without due process and, most recently, pressured Texas into gerrymandering to gain more seats in Congress. When the checks and balances of the U.S. Constitution no longer save us, what do we do?
Luckily, California Gov. Gavin Newsom has started to fight fire with fire. Proposition 50 (Prop. 50) aims to counter Texas by placing California’s redistricting council, which normally draws voting maps, on a two-year hold and hands the power back to the state government until 2030. This power will allow California to draw contrasting voting maps, switching some of California’s red congressional districts to blue, offsetting Texas in the 2026 mid-term election. The hope is that this will give Democrats a chance to win the House in 2026, or at least maintain the close split, preventing the Trump administration from passing even more damaging legislation.
After months of watching our government take blow after blow, it is refreshing to see someone take action and use the Trump administration’s tools against them. According to a poll from UC Berkley, 55% of regular voters support the measure, and it has an 87% chance of passing. Prominent political figures and celebrities alike have endorsed the measure, including Occidental’s most famous alumnus, former President Barack Obama.
However, face-to-face with the ballot, my joy for Prop. 50 disappeared. For the last two months of my life, I have spent nearly every day in the classroom as a politics student learning about the importance of precedent and representative government. Our system only works if a state representative addresses the issues of all of their constituents. This ballot measure allows the election of representatives without needing to pander to the issues faced by residents of other parties. The demands of much of our country will go unanswered. If we allow California to gerrymander, will this become a norm across all states?
In this proposed reality, a Democratic vote in a red state and a Republican vote in a blue state mean absolutely nothing. The representatives elected would be further to the right and left of the political spectrum. Polarization would skyrocket, and we would never see the compromise between parties that our founding fathers intended. Faced with these prospects, the proposition starts to make my stomach churn.
Then, there is the question of bending laws. On the front of my mini Constitution, a quote from George Washington reads, “The Constitution: its only protectors, the people.” If Democrats stop taking the high road and start using equally legally dubious measures to counter the Trump administration, who will stand and value our system of government? Much like Tinker Bell, who dies when no one believes in her, without anyone to uphold our Constitution, the rules and norms that outline our system mean absolutely nothing.
In the face of some damning pros and cons, it is tough to balance Prop. 50 out. On one hand, it is a direct, actionable measure that pushes back against a corrupt government. After all, doesn’t it say in the Declaration of Independence that we should protect ourselves from tyranny by any means necessary? On the other hand, it sets a dangerous precedent that reinforces gerrymandering and hurts equal representation. So what is more important? Should we vote ‘yes’ and try to prevent immediate tyranny while degrading democratic norms, or should we vote ‘no’ and stand idly by while our government commits violence in the name of upholding our democracy?
Personally, I am voting yes. While I acknowledge my discomfort with Prop 50, I have come to realize that standing by legality in the face of oppression makes me complicit. Slavery, segregation, Japanese internment and so many of our great American offenses have all been legal. Our system of government executed these offenses, and it was those who broke, bent or otherwise opposed the law that made real change. While it is important to make sure that our voting system represents everybody, we cannot stay comfortable, yelling democracy in the face of horrific deportations, loss of free speech and abuses of power. We must sit with the discomfort of working against the system to ensure that every member of our population remains safe, and ask ourselves: if it is our system of government that allows for continued tyranny and oppression, is it not the system itself we should change?
Contact Chloe Kummerer at kummerer@oxy.edu
