As California barrels toward the November 4, 2025, special election, two of the state’s most explosive political issues—environmental reform and congressional redistricting—are colliding in a flurry of campaign cash, legislative maneuvering, and high-stakes rhetoric. At the heart of the debate are Proposition 50, a ballot measure that could reshape the national balance of power in Congress, and sweeping changes to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which long stood as a formidable hurdle to new development.
For decades, CEQA has been a double-edged sword. Signed into law by then-Governor Ronald Reagan in 1970, it was intended to ensure that new projects—from housing to highways—underwent rigorous environmental review. But as CalMatters reported, former Governor Jerry Brown once called overhauling CEQA “the Lord’s work,” lamenting that the law made building “much-needed things—housing, transportation improvements, water storage, etc.—too difficult and too expensive.” Brown’s frustration was palpable, especially in 2018 when he vetoed a bill that would have let developers sidestep CEQA’s laborious requirements by appealing directly to local voters. “Instead of the piecemeal approach taken in this bill, I prefer a more comprehensive CEQA review, which takes into account both the urgent need for more housing and thoughtful environmental analysis,” Brown explained at the time. Yet, despite his rhetoric, Brown’s 16 years in office saw little fundamental change, leaving CEQA reform mired in political stalemate and subject to case-by-case exceptions for projects with heavyweight backers, such as professional sports venues and even the Legislature’s own Capitol construction.
Enter Governor Gavin Newsom, whose administration has faced mounting pressure as California’s housing shortage became a frontline political issue. According to CalMatters, Newsom’s campaign promises to jump-start housing construction initially struggled to gain traction. But by 2025, the tide began to turn: Newsom and the Legislature enacted a major overhaul of CEQA’s application to housing, particularly high-density, multi-family projects. Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, one of the state’s most vocal pro-housing legislators, declared, “Saying ‘no’ to housing in my community will no longer be state sanctioned. This isn’t going to solve all of our housing problems in the state, but it is going to remove the single biggest impediment to building environmentally friendly housing.”
But the story doesn’t end with housing. The California Chamber of Commerce is now pushing for an even broader transformation. As reported by CalMatters, the Chamber recently unveiled a ballot measure for the 2026 election that would streamline environmental reviews for “essential projects”—a category that includes first responder facilities, wildfire resilience projects, and broadband expansion in underserved communities. Jennifer Barrera, Chamber president, argued, “We’ve fallen too far behind in building the infrastructure that our communities desperately need. And the projects that make it through the broken permitting process become so expensive that they raise costs for all of us.” She added, “The initiative will create predictability for improvements the state desperately needs... Californians deserve a law that recognizes prosperity isn’t the enemy of preservation.”
Meanwhile, a different kind of political battle is raging over Proposition 50, the congressional redistricting measure on the November ballot. According to the Los Angeles Times, labor unions and other special interests with business before Governor Newsom have poured tens of millions of dollars into the pro-Proposition 50 campaign. The measure would redraw California’s congressional districts—currently managed by an independent commission—in a move that could potentially give Democrats five more House seats, directly countering similar redistricting efforts in GOP-led states.
Supporters argue that Proposition 50 is essential for Democrats to block President Trump’s agenda in the final years of his presidency. “There are real issues here that are at stake,” said Democratic strategist Gale Kaufman, who has represented several unions backing Newsom’s committee. “But the truth is on Proposition 50, I think it’s much less calculated than normal contributions. It really is about the issue, not about currying favor with members of the Legislature, or the congressional delegation, or the governor. Even though, of course, it benefits them if we win.”
The numbers are staggering. Newsom’s pro-Proposition 50 committee has raised over $116 million as of late October, with more than $23 million coming from unions representing California school teachers, carpenters, state workers, and nurses. The House Majority PAC, the Democrats’ congressional fundraising arm, has contributed at least $15 million. On the individual donor front, billionaire financier George Soros gave $10 million, while hedge-fund founder Tom Steyer chipped in $12 million. On the other side, Charles Munger Jr. has contributed $32.8 million to the opposition, with GOP groups also investing heavily.
The California Chamber of Commerce, notably, has chosen to remain neutral on Proposition 50, while major petroleum companies have also stayed on the sidelines. Yet, the campaign’s stakes are clear: if Proposition 50 passes, it could tip the balance of power in the U.S. House of Representatives, potentially derailing key elements of Trump’s agenda and prompting a wave of congressional hearings on issues ranging from immigration to military deployments in U.S. cities.
Labor’s influence is unmistakable. The California Conference of Carpenters union, with 70,000 members, has donated at least $4 million and has been hailed by Newsom for its role in advancing housing reforms. Daniel M. Curtin, the union’s director, wrote to legislators, “These are not normal times, and this isn’t politics as usual. Not only has the Trump administration denied disaster assistance to victims of California’s devastating forest fires, he’s damaging our CA economy with mass arrests of law-abiding workers without warrants.”
The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has contributed more than $5.5 million to the pro-Proposition 50 campaign. On October 12, SEIU celebrated Newsom’s signing of bills to protect workers’ rights and privacy from federal overreach. David Huerta, SEIU California president, praised Newsom for “standing up to federal overreach and indiscriminate, violent attacks on our communities.” Huerta himself was arrested during U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in June but now faces only misdemeanor charges, according to recent court filings.
The California Teachers Association (CTA) has also been a major player, contributing over $3.3 million. CTA President David Goldberg emphasized that their support goes beyond union interests: “It’s about our livelihood but it really is about fundamental issues... for people who serve students who are just incredibly under attack right now.”
Yet not everyone is convinced. Amy Thoma, spokesperson for the Voters First Coalition (which is backed by Munger Jr.), warned, “The independent redistricting commission exists to prevent conflicts of interest and money from influencing line drawing. That’s why we want to preserve its independence.” Lorena Gonzalez, head of the California Labor Federation, acknowledged the awkward timing of union donations but insisted, “Never be too close to your elected officials. Because we see the good, the bad, the ugly.”
With millions of mail ballots already returned and both sides marshaling national political heavyweights, the coming weeks promise a pitched battle over the future of California’s democracy—and perhaps the nation’s. The outcome of Proposition 50 and the ongoing struggle over CEQA reform could reshape not only how California builds its future, but who gets to decide what that future looks like.
