Proposition 27 was an unsuccessful ballot proposition on the November 2, 2010 ballot in California, placed there by the initiative process. If approved, this measure would have repealed California Proposition 11 (2008), which authorized the creation of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission to draw the electoral boundaries for State Assembly and State Senate districts. It would also have modified the provision in California law that says that proposed congressional districts can't be subjected to a veto referendum. According to political journalist Shane Goldmacher, Democratic political strategists said that this initiative was a political tactic to defeat Proposition 20, the Congressional Redistricting Initiative, which was also on the November 2, 2010 ballot: "Democratic political strategists say the best way to ensure a 'no' vote this fall on California Proposition 20 is to confuse the public further with a second ballot measure on the already head spinning topic of political line drawing." This tactic was ultimately unsuccessful, as Proposition 20 passed, extending the Commission's power over redistricting to include U.S. House districts. Proposition 27 and Proposition 20 each had a so-called "poison pill" provision. This meant that if both received a majority vote, the proposition that received the highest majority vote would be the law to go into effect. Since Proposition 20 passed but Proposition 27 did not, neither provision was triggered. Ballot title and summary Ballot title: Financial Accountability in Redistricting Act of 2010" Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute Official summary: Eliminates 14-member redistricting commission selected from applicant pool picked by government auditors. Consolidates authority for establishing state Assembly, Senate, and Board of Equalization district boundaries with elected state representatives responsible for drawing congressional districts. Reduces budget, and imposes limit on amount Legislature may spend, for redistricting. Provides that voters will have the authority to reject district boundary maps approved by the Legislature. Requires populations of all districts for the same office to be exactly the same. Estimated fiscal impact: Possible reduction of state redistricting costs of around $1 million over the next year. Likely reduction of state redistricting costs of a few million dollars once every ten years beginning in 2020. Constitutional changes If Proposition 27 was approved by California's voters, it would have amended some parts of the California Constitution. Specifically, it will amend: Section 9 of Article II Section 1 of Article XXI Section 2 of Article XXI Section 3 of Article XXI Supporters Daniel Lowenstein, the official