The Peace and Freedom Party has published a collection of member perspectives on Proposition 50, a ballot measure appearing before California voters this year that would authorize the legislature to redraw the state’s congressional map ahead of the next redistricting period.
In an October 1 statement, Chair Kevin Akin said the organization would not be taking an official position “either for or against Proposition 50,” arguing that both sides “perpetuate a winner-take-all system which does not give voters a choice beyond the two ruling parties.” The proposition, titled the “Election Rigging Response Act,” would temporarily replace California’s congressional district maps with new ones drawn by the state legislature. These maps would remain in effect through the 2030 election cycle, after which the state’s independent Citizens Redistricting Commission would resume control following the next census.
The measure was introduced by California lawmakers in response to aggressive redistricting efforts in Texas, where Republican legislators redrew maps to eliminate several Democratic-held districts. Similar tactics have since appeared in other Republican-controlled states, prompting California Democrats to propose Proposition 50 as a countermeasure intended to preserve their congressional representation.
“The Peace and Freedom Party is not making a formal recommendation on Proposition 50,” the statement reads. “Partisan gerrymandering does nothing to bring about a political system in which working people have more power.”
Akin reiterated the party’s support for proportional representation through multi-member districts, which he said would ensure a broader range of viewpoints, as well as called for reducing the influence of money in politics. “Working people need their own parties,” he continued, “and working people need socialist solutions to the problems inflicted upon them by the billionaires.”
Akin acknowledged that many Peace and Freedom members will likely still support the measure, especially those who oppose the direction of the Trump administration. Still, the party approached the symposium as an opportunity to highlight the diversity of views within its membership.
The symposium features a range of views from Peace and Freedom Party members, some of whom support Proposition 50 as a tactical response to far-right gerrymandering. South State Organizer Sheila Xiao and 2026 gubernatorial candidate Ramsey Robinson both said they endorse a “yes” vote, viewing the proposal as a way to counter partisan power grabs by Republicans and defend working-class interests. However, both still argue that building independent political power beyond the two-party system remains the most effective method of change.
Other contributors take a more skeptical view, acknowledging the measure’s intent but warning that it does not constitute an adequate response. State officer Marsha Feinland and former State Treasurer Dave Kadlecek both argue that the measure fails to address systemic exclusion and offers only symbolic resistance to authoritarianism. Kadlecek calls for mass mobilization and civil resistance, warning that “electoral game-playing” contributes little, while Feinland warns that partisan redistricting merely shifts advantages among the Republican and Democratic parties.
“Keeping the current map does not safeguard electoral democracy,” Feinland wrote. “As long as the electoral system allows only the two dominant parties to win seats, the people without wealth in this country will not get representation.
Some members oppose the measure outright. Party member Cat Woods criticizes Proposition 50 as a betrayal of democratic principle, likening it to historical examples of power consolidation and warning of “a Pyrrhic victory” in exchange for principles. Meanwhile, former Executive Committee member Bob Richard is encouraging voters to abstain, framing the fight as one between Democrats and Republicans that should not involve third party voters, and suggesting it instead presents an opportunity for the party to advocate for proportional representation.
Full responses are available on the Peace and Freedom Party website. The special election on the measure is scheduled for November 4, 2025.
As I said in 2008 and 2010, the only way to make redistricting work in a truly nonpartisan manner is to have only the third parties do it.
The only way to oppose a winner take all system is to vote NO what Gavin Newsom is trying to do is turn back the clock to the worst of the worst partisan gerrymandering,
One ironic outcome of attempting to increase partisan districts in a state is that a number of “safe” districts actually become more competitive. New York state tried to stretch their Democratic districts a few years ago, and overdid it, losing a few seats that they thought were “safe”.