Leaked California redistricting maps show where Democrats would draw new lines
The maps appear to make significant changes to many districts currently held by Republicans. Districts represented by Reps. Doug LaMalfa, R-Chico, and Kevin Kiley, R-Rocklin, change dramatically, making them possible Democratic pickups. Swing districts held by Reps. Adam Gray, D-Turlock; Josh Harder, D-Stockton; and George Whitesides, D-Santa Clarita, appear to become easier to hold for Democrats. The maps appear to also pack more Democrats into the districts of Rep. David Valadao, R-Bakersfield — already a difficult seat for Republicans to hold — and Rep. Darrell Issa, R-San Diego, making it a possible Democratic target.
The maps were still being debated on Friday, KCRA reported. Nick Miller, a spokesperson for Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, said he had not seen KCRA's maps when asked to confirm their authenticity.
Democrats intend to imperil at least five Republican incumbents, Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders have said.
The maps represent the centerpiece of Newsom's plan to counter efforts in Texas and other Republican-dominated states to redraw their congressional districts to further favor the GOP. In Texas and most other states, congressional maps are drawn by state lawmakers and can be manipulated by whichever party is in power. But in California, maps are drawn by an independent redistricting commission that includes equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans.
The proposed ballot measure would replace the commission's maps with the new ones released by the Legislature. They would be in effect for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections. After that, the independent commission would draw new maps based on the 2030 census.
That argument has not assuaged opponents, particularly in the Republican Party.
'No matter how you slice it, he is undermining the will of the voters,' Assembly Republican Leader James Gallagher, R-Yuba City, told the Chronicle ahead of the maps' release.
He said he thinks the independent commission has drawn fair maps and that he worries new maps drawn to benefit Democrats will diminish the voting power of people in rural parts of the state.
Gallagher said he supports an effort by Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Rocklin, who previously served in the state Assembly, to bar all states from engaging in mid-decade redistricting. That could halt efforts in California as well as in Texas, though Gallagher stopped short of criticizing Texas Republicans for their redistricting push, saying that was not his role.
LaMalfa said he opposes Kiley's bill because he doesn't think the federal government should trample on states' rights to run their own elections. But he also opposes efforts in both California and Texas to redistrict mid-decade.
'Two wrongs don't make a right,' LaMalfa said in response to Newsom's argument that Texas' redistricting forced his hand.
Under the draft map, LaMalfa's district seems to change dramatically, shedding ruby-red northern counties like Modoc, Siskiyou and Shasta. Instead, it gains somewhat less-red Plumas County, but it will also extend south and west to include parts of much bluer Mendocino, Lake, and Sonoma counties along the Highway 101 corridor — including, apparently, much of the North Bay city of Santa Rosa.
Amy Thoma Tan, a spokesperson for the campaign opposing Newsom's ballot measure, said it was inappropriate for state lawmakers, some of whom are actively running for Congress, to draw new maps.
'These maps were drawn by politicians and party insiders behind closed doors with no transparency and no input from the public,' she wrote in a statement. 'Californians deserve district lines that are drawn in the open, by our citizens' independent commission.'
'Californians oppose Newsom's stunt because they won't let a self-serving politician rig the system to further his career,' he wrote in a statement. 'The NRCC is prepared to fight this illegal power grab in the courts and at the ballot box to stop Newsom in his tracks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
2 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Was Trump right to send National Guard to Washington, D.C.?
David Bumcrot Belmont Heather Mac Donald cites several shooting incidents in Washington, D.C., including two heinous crimes involving the shooting deaths of innocent young children. Nowhere does she mention how Republicans block every effort at enacting gun-control legislation. Also left out is the number of convicted felons that President Trump has pardoned. Let's stop pretending this isn't just Trump's attempt to initiate martial law. Advertisement Robyn King Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Ipswich In Trump's political theater, Washington becomes a prop President Trump's National Guard deployment to Washington, D.C. is less about public safety and more about political theater. D.C.'s violent crime rates have fallen sharply since 2023. Cherry-picking a few brutal crimes to paint the city as in crisis ignores the data and serves a narrative, not the truth. If homicide rates alone justified military involvement, other US cities — some worse off than D.C. — would already be occupied by federal troops. The National Guard's limited 'command presence' won't fix longstanding issues of gun violence, juvenile crime, or car theft. Lasting reductions come from targeted policing, intelligence-driven enforcement, and community partnerships — not a 30-day show of force. Advertisement Worse, the move undermines D.C.'s elected leadership and sets a dangerous precedent for federal overreach. Washington's majority-minority residents have endured decades of over-policing. Imposing military oversight without an emergency inflames mistrust, chills cooperation with police, and treats citizens like subjects. Real safety is built, not staged. This deployment is a political stunt masquerading as crime control — and Washington deserves better than to be used as a prop in someone else's campaign. Paul Swindlehurst Londonderry, N.H. For this administration, an easy distraction It seems our president has found the secret for making the Jeffrey Epstein controversy go away: Invade Washington, D.C. It's amazing how short the media's attention span is. They are so easily distracted by the next outrageous thing President Trump and his representatives do or say. There is no follow-up, no accountability — essentially just narration and public relations. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon was so right: 'Flood the zone,' and you can do anything. Patricia Fabbri Lynnfield
30 minutes ago
Trump runs into the difficulty of Putin diplomacy and ending a long war
NEW YORK -- President Donald Trump walked into a summit with Russia's Vladimir Putin pressing for a ceasefire deal and threatening 'severe consequences' and tough new sanctions if the Kremlin leader failed to agree to halt the fighting in Ukraine. Instead, Trump was the one who stood down, dropping his demand for a ceasefire in favor of pursuing a full peace accord — a position that aligns with Putin's. After calls with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, Trump wrote as he flew home from Friday's meeting in Alaska that it had been 'determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.' It was a dramatic reversal that laid bare the challenges of dealing with Putin, a cunning adversary, as well as the complexities of a conflict that Trump had repeatedly boasted during his campaign that he could solve within 24 hours. Few details have emerged about what the two leaders discussed or what constituted the progress they both touted. The White House did not respond to messages seeking comment Saturday. While European leaders were relieved that Trump did not agree to a deal that ceded territory or otherwise favored Moscow, the summit allowed Putin to reclaim his place on the world stage and may have bought Russia more time to push forward with its offensive in Ukraine. 'We're back to where we were before without him having gone to Alaska,' said Fiona Hill, who served as Trump's senior adviser on Russia at the National Security Council during his first term, including when he last met Putin in Helsinki in 2018. In an interview, Hill argued that Trump had emerged from the meeting in a weaker position on the world stage because of his reversal. Other leaders, she said, might now look at the U.S. president and think he's 'not the big guy that he thinks he is and certainly not the dealmaking genius.' 'All the way along, Trump was convinced he has incredible forces of persuasion,' she said, but he came out of the meeting without a ceasefire — the 'one thing' he had been pushing for, even after he gave the Russian leader the 'red carpet treatment." Trump has 'run up against a rock in the form of Putin, who doesn't want anything from him apart from Ukraine," she said. At home, Democrats expressed alarm at what at times seemed like a day of deference, with Trump clapping for Putin as he walked down a red carpet during an elaborate ceremony welcoming him to U.S. soil for the first time in a decade. The two rode together in the presidential limousine and exchanged compliments. Trump seemed to revel in particular in Putin echoing his oft-repeated assertion that Russia never would have invaded Ukraine if Trump had been in office instead of Democrat Joe Biden at the time. Before news cameras, Trump did not use the opportunity to castigate Putin for launching the largest ground invasion in Europe since World War II or human rights abuses he's been accused of committing. Instead, Putin was the one who spoke first, and invited Trump to join him in Moscow next. 'President Trump appears to have been played yet again by Vladimir Putin," said Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 'The President rolled out a red carpet and warmly greeted a murderous dictator on American soil and reports indicate he got nothing concrete in return.' 'Enough is enough," she went on. 'If President Trump won't act, Congress must do so decisively by passing crushing sanctions when we return in the coming weeks.' Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat who is the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he supports diplomacy but 'peacemaking must be done responsibly.' 'Instead of caving to Putin, the U.S. should join our allies in levying tough, targeted new sanctions on Russia to intensify the economic pressure,' he said. Trump has tried to cast himself as a peacemaker, taking credit for helping deescalate conflicts between India and Pakistan as well as Thailand and Cambodia. He proudly mediated a peace agreement between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo and another between the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan to end decades of fighting. Trump has set his eye on the Nobel Peace Prize, with numerous allies offering nominations. But Trump has struggled to made headway on the world's two most vexing conflicts: the Russia-Ukraine war and Israel's offensive in Gaza against Hamas. In Washington, the summit was met by little response from Trump's allies. Republican lawmakers who spoke out were largely reserved and generally called for continued talks and constructive actions from the Trump administration. 'President Trump brought Rwanda and the DRC to terms, India and Pakistan to terms, Armenia and Azerbaijan to terms. I believe in our President, and believe he will do what he always does — rise to the challenge,' Rep. Brian Mast, a Florida Republican who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement to The Associated Press. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, wrote on social media after the summit that 'while the press conference offered few details about their meeting" she was "cautiously optimistic about the signals that some level of progress was made." Murkowski said it 'was also encouraging to hear both presidents reference future meetings" but that Ukraine 'must be part of any negotiated settlement and must freely agree to its terms.' Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and close Trump ally, offered that he was 'very proud' of Trump for having had the face-to-face meeting and was 'cautiously optimistic' that the war might end 'well before Christmas' if a trilateral meeting between Trump, Zelenskyy and Putin transpires. 'I have all the confidence in the world that Donald Trump will make it clear to Putin this war will never start again. If it does, you're going to pay a heavy price,' he said on Fox News. For some Trump allies, the very act of him meeting with Putin was success enough: conservative activist and podcaster Charlie Kirk called it 'a great thing.' But in Europe, the summit was seen as a major diplomatic coup for Putin, who has been eager to emerge from geopolitical isolation. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia's Security Council, praised the summit as a breakthrough in restoring high-level dialogue between Moscow and Washington, describing the talks as 'calm, without ultimatums and threats.' Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt said the summit was 'a distinct win for Putin. He didn't yield an inch' but was also 'a distinct setback for Trump. No ceasefire in sight.' 'What the world sees is a weak and wobbling America,' Bildt posted on X.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Trump runs into the difficulty of Putin diplomacy and ending a long war
NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump walked into a summit with Russia's Vladimir Putin pressing for a ceasefire deal and threatening 'severe consequences' and tough new sanctions if the Kremlin leader failed to agree to halt the fighting in Ukraine. Instead, Trump was the one who stood down, dropping his demand for a ceasefire in favor of pursuing a full peace accord — a position that aligns with Putin's. After calls with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, Trump wrote as he flew home from Friday's meeting in Alaska that it had been 'determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.' It was a dramatic reversal that laid bare the challenges of dealing with Putin, a cunning adversary, as well as the complexities of a conflict that Trump had repeatedly boasted during his campaign that he could solve within 24 hours. Trump's position after the summit with Putin Few details have emerged about what the two leaders discussed or what constituted the progress they both touted. The White House did not respond to messages seeking comment Saturday. While European leaders were relieved that Trump did not agree to a deal that ceded territory or otherwise favored Moscow, the summit allowed Putin to reclaim his place on the world stage and may have bought Russia more time to push forward with its offensive in Ukraine. 'We're back to where we were before without him having gone to Alaska,' said Fiona Hill, who served as Trump's senior adviser on Russia at the National Security Council during his first term, including when he last met Putin in Helsinki in 2018. In an interview, Hill argued that Trump had emerged from the meeting in a weaker position on the world stage because of his reversal. Other leaders, she said, might now look at the U.S. president and think he's 'not the big guy that he thinks he is and certainly not the dealmaking genius.' 'All the way along, Trump was convinced he has incredible forces of persuasion,' she said, but he came out of the meeting without a ceasefire — the 'one thing' he had been pushing for, even after he gave the Russian leader the 'red carpet treatment.' Trump has 'run up against a rock in the form of Putin, who doesn't want anything from him apart from Ukraine,' she said. Democrats call for consequences for Putin At home, Democrats expressed alarm at what at times seemed like a day of deference, with Trump clapping for Putin as he walked down a red carpet during an elaborate ceremony welcoming him to U.S. soil for the first time in a decade. The two rode together in the presidential limousine and exchanged compliments. Trump seemed to revel in particular in Putin echoing his oft-repeated assertion that Russia never would have invaded Ukraine if Trump had been in office instead of Democrat Joe Biden at the time. Before news cameras, Trump did not use the opportunity to castigate Putin for launching the largest ground invasion in Europe since World War II or human rights abuses he's been accused of committing. Instead, Putin was the one who spoke first, and invited Trump to join him in Moscow next. 'President Trump appears to have been played yet again by Vladimir Putin,' said Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 'The President rolled out a red carpet and warmly greeted a murderous dictator on American soil and reports indicate he got nothing concrete in return.' 'Enough is enough,' she went on. 'If President Trump won't act, Congress must do so decisively by passing crushing sanctions when we return in the coming weeks.' Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat who is the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he supports diplomacy but 'peacemaking must be done responsibly.' 'Instead of caving to Putin, the U.S. should join our allies in levying tough, targeted new sanctions on Russia to intensify the economic pressure,' he said. Trump has touted himself as the president of peace Trump has tried to cast himself as a peacemaker, taking credit for helping deescalate conflicts between India and Pakistan as well as Thailand and Cambodia. He proudly mediated a peace agreement between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo and another between the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan to end decades of fighting. Trump has set his eye on the Nobel Peace Prize, with numerous allies offering nominations. But Trump has struggled to made headway on the world's two most vexing conflicts: the Russia-Ukraine war and Israel's offensive in Gaza against Hamas. Republicans and Trump allies offer little response so far In Washington, the summit was met by little response from Trump's allies. Republican lawmakers who spoke out were largely reserved and generally called for continued talks and constructive actions from the Trump administration. 'President Trump brought Rwanda and the DRC to terms, India and Pakistan to terms, Armenia and Azerbaijan to terms. I believe in our President, and believe he will do what he always does — rise to the challenge,' Rep. Brian Mast, a Florida Republican who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement to The Associated Press. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, wrote on social media after the summit that 'while the press conference offered few details about their meeting' she was 'cautiously optimistic about the signals that some level of progress was made.' Murkowski said it 'was also encouraging to hear both presidents reference future meetings' but that Ukraine 'must be part of any negotiated settlement and must freely agree to its terms.' Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and close Trump ally, offered that he was 'very proud' of Trump for having had the face-to-face meeting and was 'cautiously optimistic' that the war might end 'well before Christmas' if a trilateral meeting between Trump, Zelenskyy and Putin transpires. 'I have all the confidence in the world that Donald Trump will make it clear to Putin this war will never start again. If it does, you're going to pay a heavy price,' he said on Fox News. For some Trump allies, the very act of him meeting with Putin was success enough: conservative activist and podcaster Charlie Kirk called it 'a great thing.' Some see a Putin win and a Trump loss But in Europe, the summit was seen as a major diplomatic coup for Putin, who has been eager to emerge from geopolitical isolation. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia's Security Council, praised the summit as a breakthrough in restoring high-level dialogue between Moscow and Washington, describing the talks as 'calm, without ultimatums and threats.' Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt said the summit was 'a distinct win for Putin. He didn't yield an inch' but was also 'a distinct setback for Trump. No ceasefire in sight.' 'What the world sees is a weak and wobbling America,' Bildt posted on X.
