Report: South Carolina Governor to Call for Special Session Over Redistricting Efforts
Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey said that the “legislative leadership is in the process of informing their membership to come back into session to debate the maps.”
Numerous outlets have reported that South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, a Republican, will call lawmakers back to the State House to hold a special session over redistricting efforts.
Five Republican state senators voted with Democrats to block legislation to redraw South Carolina’s Congressional map.
The Senate needed a two-thirds vote to advance it.
The legislation fell two votes short.
According to the Post and Courier, Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey said that the “legislative leadership is in the process of informing their membership to come back into session to debate the maps.”
McMaster’s office has not commented, though.
Massey was one of the Republicans who voted against advancing the legislation, claiming the state is “the most gerrymandered Republican state in the country already.”
Massey also insisted that the “attempts to draw a 7-0 Republican map might result in a 5-2 split.”
The House voted 87-25 to add redrawing the state’s Congressional map to a resolution outlining what the legislature can do when its session ends on May 14.
The idea is to make the state 7R – 0D. Right now, Rep. Jim Clyburn is the only Democrat holding a seat in South Carolina.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I’m confused–the Senate vote fell two votes short, and the governor is calling the Senate back. Are they voting again? Is this a different approach?
He doesn’t need a 2/3 with a special session.
That sure doesn’t look like the most gerrymandered map I’ve seen.
You misunderstand the term gerrymandered.
Anything that prevents blacks from having a majority district is technically “gerrymandered” because Republicans are racist and hate black people/
See?
Time for some well qualified conservative Black Republicans to run & win in a few of those re-drawn districts. If only the R party could gets its $h1t together. That would be glorious!
There is a Black Republican lady over in Nashville that lost to an old white guy a couple of times. The Dems were hysterical trying to prevent her from representing the majority black district. This tells you race has nothing to do with it, it’s all about Dem power.
Memphis, not Nashville.
Anything that is deliberately designed to achieve a particular result is a gerrymander. It’s not necessary to have districts with fanciful shapes; that merely highlights their nature and invites ridicule, hence the name from “Gerry’s salamander”. Gerry himself opposed the idea, but he didn’t think it was illegal, so he didn’t veto it, and as a result his name got stuck to it forever.
Elbridge Gerry. Signer of the Declaration of Independence, Gov of Mass and Vice President under James Madison. I’d say he had some insight into the subject and as you say, was not happy about it. Why he would sign it appears to be to keep his party in power although he lost the next election. A man of principle cast them aside for raw political partisanship.
He signed it because he didn’t believe it was illegal. Unethical, but not illegal. He didn’t think it was his place to override what the legislature wanted, so long as the constitution permitted it.
Leave it to the governor to finally do the right thing…
I have it on good authority that Elbridge Gerry (pronounced Gary) was a racist.
So should we call it ‘Garymandering’. I hear everyone say it as ‘Jerrymandering’
If we want to be true to the original pronunciation, yes, though with all the negativity associated with the term, I suspect his posterity prefers the common pronunciation.
I oppose this. Not because it would, maybe, force Clyburn into retirement who turned from a civil rights champion into a race grievance king with the rest of them but because the legislature voted.
As for Clyburn, if he is as great as everyone claims he should have no problem being elected. If they have to create a special district just so he can sit in DC then he doesn’t belong in the House. Why are Dems so afraid to compete on a level field with everyone else? Is it because they are racist and don’t think blacks can get elected on their own or vote without being told who to vote for or is it that their policies and agenda do not have the support of the majority of Americans?
The legislature voted on whether to hold a special session, not on the districting itself.
PS: A clear majority of legislators wanted the special session, just not enough for them to call it on their own. So now the governor is giving that majority what they wanted.
In 2024 the vote was roughly 60% Republican to 40% Democrat, but Republicans walked away with 86% of the seats 6:1.
It’s not the most gerrymandered Republican state – Tennessee is 8:1, but Republicans still can’t beat Democrats for gerrymandering.
Illinois voted 47% Republican, 53% Democrat, but seats went 82% Democrat, 18% Republican (3R to 14D).
California voted similar to South Carolina albeit in reverse – 39% Republican, 60% Democrat, but seats went 83% Democrat, 17% Republican (9R to 43D).
Looking purely at the proportional votes to how seats should have split, Illinois and California alone steal 16 seats that should have gone Republican. You can of course argue that all the smaller Republican states putting their thumbs on the scale offset the Democrat gerrymander, but if each state is looked at in isolation …