California’s Redistricting Moves Are About Protecting Democracy

When asked on CNN whether California’s redistricting efforts reflect a case of two wrongs, gubernatorial candidate and former Representative Katie Porter explained that Sacramento’s approach differs significantly from Texas’s. California initially hoped that a promise to undertake fair redistricting would deter Texas from gerrymandering, but Texas proceeded regardless.

Porter emphasized that California’s process involves the people, with decisions made through a democratic, transparent system, unlike Texas where the legislature is deeply involved in partisan redistricting. California is using democratic tools to counteract what she describes as undemocratic, authoritarian activities that are emerging from Washington. Importantly, the current changes are temporary, as California plans to revert to its independent redistricting process in a few years, signaling a temporary response to broader anti-democratic threats.

The mainstream media often fails to highlight these critical differences. Instead of acknowledging California’s attempt to safeguard democracy against authoritarian tactics—especially in light of recent threats from figures like Donald Trump—the press tends to criticize Democrats for fighting back. This lack of coverage ignores the clear distinction: California’s measures are about strengthening democratic processes, not undermining them.

As Porter pointed out, the actions taken by California are a response to threats of authoritarianism that could threaten election integrity. Instead of dismissing these efforts, media outlets should focus on why California is taking such measures—to ensure democracy prevails. Highlighting these differences could illuminate the broader stakes involved in preserving free elections against attempts at rigging or authoritarian control.