Breaking News: Newsom vs. Schwarzenegger on Partisan Gerrymander of CA House Lines

Arnold Schwarzenegger, the iconic action star and California’s governor from 2003 to 2011, is getting ready to take on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s plan to counter the threat of Texas’ Republican-led gerrymandering with a Democratic redistricting in California. Schwarzenegger championed California’s 2008 Proposition 11 and 2010 Proposition 20, which created an independent commission to draw state legislative and congressional maps, curbing overt partisan manipulation (some would say that the current lopsided 43-9 lines show fairness still eludes this process). His team told Politico he sees gerrymandering as “evil,” robbing voters of a fair say in elections. It is likely that he will reunite old allies like the League of Women Voters to defend his legacy of impartial map-drawing, a system designed to prioritize voters over politicians.

Power Play or Necessary Response?

Newsom’s proposal, triggered by Texas’ GOP effort to add five Republican congressional seats, would allow Democrats to redraw California’s maps for 2026, 2028, and 2030. Democrats, holding 43 of 52 House seats, could flip districts held by Republicans representatives Doug LaMalfa, Young Kim, Ken Calvert, and David Valadao, while forcing GOP primaries between Kevin Kiley and Tom McClintock, and between Vince Fong and Jay Obernolte. In my analysis last week, I posted a map showing how new lines could reduce Republican seats from nine to three by reshaping purple districts into solidly blue ones. This plan scraps the independent commission voters backed leading Schwarzenegger to argue it sets a risky precedent that erodes trust in our elections – that two wrongs do not make a right.

Tight Timeline, High Costs

With lawmakers back in less than two weeks, Democrats are racing against the clock to draw new maps, hold hearings, and get a two-thirds vote to put this on the November ballot. The special election’s $200 million cost strains California’s $20 billion deficit, raising questions about priorities. If Schwarzenegger engages in a battle here, he only knows one way to campaign: all in. Expect him to go all out, which could include dipping into his deep pockets (he’s worth hundreds of millions) to protect the independent commission. As I noted in my piece last week, Newsom’s team likely sees this as a calculated risk, banking on voter approval to counter Texas’ gerrymander, but Schwarzenegger’s opposition could sway public opinion.

Strategic Risks and National Implications

The back-and-forth redistricting plans in California and Texas could decide who controls the House in 2026, shaping how much pushback Trump’s agenda faces. Schwarzenegger’s campaign, potentially backed by national Republican funds and philanthropists like Charles Munger Jr. (who put up a lot of his own cash to pay for campaign ads for the two measures), aims to frame this as a betrayal of fair elections, emphasizing the value of impartial map-drawing over partisan maneuvering.

So, Does It Matter?

Newsom’s response to Texas’ gerrymandering threat may strengthen Democrats’ grip on the House but risks eroding trust in California’s electoral process. Bypassing Schwarzenegger’s independent commission could alienate voters valuing impartiality, particularly independents and moderates. I was interviewed by the LA Times for this piece yesterday in which said: “Our statewide Republican fundraising has atrophied because it has been over a generation since we had a viable statewide candidate in California. The kind of money that it would take to battle this — it would have to be national funding effort.” I also noted: “If Gavin Newsom places this on the ballot, it means he’s already done his polling and has figured out that it will pass because he cares more about running for President than redistricting in California.” Which is why last week I emphasized the need for a robust response. This kind of maneuver will only deepen voter distrust, the last thing we need when we’re trying to strengthen our democracy.

Originally published at “So Does it Matter – with Jon Fleischman.”