Greenberg: Seven times Newsom Crushed Voters’ Will

Governor Newsom portrays himself a “progressive champion,” yet his tenure reveals a disturbing pattern of executive overreach that undermines the democratic will of our state’s voters. Promising bold leadership, he has instead prioritized personal ideology over ballot-box mandates, overriding voter-approved measures on criminal justice, electoral integrity, fiscal responsibilty and capital punishment. His actions, these seven notable instances, apparently treat voter initiatives as optional; he truly is eroding trust in democracy.

Here are seven instances where Newsom has ignored, refused, or obstructed the implementation of voter-approved initiatives:

1. Proposition 50 (2025): Undermining the Independent Redistricting Commission

Back in 2010, 61% of California voters approved Proposition 20, establishing an independent redistricting commission to curb gerrymandering and ensure fair electoral maps. This nonpartisan body has since produced equitable maps. However, and as has made national headlines, Newsom pushed Proposition 50, a special election ballot measure to suspend that commission and empower the Democratic-majority legislature to redraw maps. This move contradicted Newsom’s prior support for the commission and his criticism of special elections as “wasteful” during his 2021 recall defense. Former Democratic commissioners decried the “moral conflict,” warning it would erode trust in a process voters supported by a 2-to-1 margin. Newsom’s selective fidelity to voter intent—defending the commission when it benefits Democrats, dismantling it for partisan gain—undermines democratic principles.

2. Proposition 36 (2024): Defunding Tough-on-Crime Reforms

Last November 2024, 68% of California voters approved Proposition 36, a response to rampant retail theft and the fentanyl crisis. The ballot measure rolled back key elements of the lenient Proposition 47, reinstating felony charges for repeat drug and theft offenders while mandating treatment programs. Despite this voter mandate, Newsom’s May 2025 budget allocated no direct funding for implementation, citing a $12 billion deficit and shifting state costs onto local governments. This defied the measure’s statewide scope and echoed Newsom’s campaign opposition, where he warned of inflated incarceration rates—a claim unsupported by the measure’s treatment-focused provisions. This was insult to voters. By September 2025, Newsom touted $127 million in behavioral health grants, but California counties argue these fell short of the $250 million needed for enforcement and diversion programs. By purposefully underfunding Proposition 36, Newsom rendered our landslide voter victory ineffective, betraying the 70% mandate.

3. Proposition 66 (2016): Halting the Death Penalty

In 2016, California voters approved Proposition 66, streamlining appeals to expedite executions and again reaffirming capital punishment for a third time. With 737 inmates on death row, voters sought swift justice for victims’ families. Yet, in 2019, Newsom issued Executive Order N-02-19, imposing a moratorium on executions, shuttering San Quentin’s death chamber, and withdrawing lethal injection protocols. Citing moral concerns—racial bias and risks of executing the innocent—Newsom ignored the will of voters’ endorsement of a reformed system. Even prosecutors argued this act “usurped the express will of voters,” as Newsom’s abolitionist views superseded democratic consensus. His action bypassed the ballot, leaving the system in legal limbo. Newsom’s refusal to fully fund Proposition 66’s requirements, including staffing for death row facilities, has cost taxpayers billions -with no executions- further defying voter intent.

4. Proposition 35 (2024): Raiding Mental Health Funds

Passed by 68% in 2024, Proposition 35 allocates tobacco taxes earmarked for behavioral health programs, while prohibiting redirection of those funds to the state’s general fund. However, Newsom’s 2025 budget diverted , you guessed it, $1.2 billion from that fund, delaying $500 million in services. Advocates sued, calling the move “unconstitutional” and a betrayal of voter intent.

5. Proposition 13 (1978): Circumventing Property Tax Limits

Approved in 1978, Proposition 13 caps property tax increases at 1% annually and requires two-thirds voter approval for new local taxes, protecting homeowners from reassessment spikes. Newsom’s actions have repeatedly sidestepped these protections. In 2020, his Executive Orders N-25-20 and N-66-20 authorized $2.5 billion in state spending on local aid, labeled as “fees” to bypass Proposition 13’s 2/3rd supermajority requirement. In 2025, his budget proposed redirecting $4.5 billion in local government funds, such as vehicle license fees, to the general fund, shifting revenue burdens onto property owners. Bills like AB 130 (2024) further allowed local “assessments” exceeding Proposition 13 caps. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association sued in 2020, partially succeeding, but similar proposals persist in 2025. These moves increase effective tax burdens without voter approval, violating Proposition 13’s intent. Does he care? Obviously no.

6. Proposition 47 (2014): Undermining Rehabilitation Mandates

Proposition 47, as we all know, reclassified certain thefts (under $950) and drug possession as misdemeanors, redirecting savings to rehabilitation and schools. As governor, Newsom has underfunded these mandates, allocating only $150 million of the required $375 million annually for drug treatment in 2024–2025 budgets. His 2023 Executive Order N-05-23, extended into 2024, directed state attorneys to deprioritize Proposition 47-related misdemeanor prosecutions, weakening enforcement. Counties reported 20–30% fewer treatment slots, contributing to theft spikes that prompted the response, the successful Proposition 36’s passage. Newsom again is insulting voters by defunding reforms, rendering the initiative’s intent all but ineffective.

7. Proposition 209 (1996): Challenging Affirmative Action Bans

Approved in 1996, Proposition 209 prohibits race, gender, and ethnicity preferences in public employment, education, and contracting. In 2020, Newsom signed AB 2426, allowing race-conscious COVID-19 recovery grants, which a federal court then struck down in 2021 as violating Proposition 209. His 2021 Executive Order N-20-21 directed agencies to “consider equity” in hiring, bypassing the ban. Lawsuits forced compliance, with $100 million in grants clawed back. Newsom’s executive overreach again.