South Carolina lawmakers are weighing a controversial proposal to redraw the state’s congressional districts just weeks before the June primaries, a move that could delay congressional elections statewide and change voting timelines for residents across the state — including in Clarendon County.
Under the proposed congressional map, Clarendon County would remain in the 6th Congressional District. However, local voters could see changes to congressional primary dates and election timelines if lawmakers ultimately approve the legislation.
The debate follows a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that rejected Louisiana’s congressional map over racial gerrymandering concerns. Republican leaders have said the White House encouraged South Carolina lawmakers to revisit the state’s congressional map following the ruling.
The House voted 87-25 on May 6 to allow lawmakers to continue congressional redistricting discussions after the legislative session ends May 14. A House Judiciary subcommittee later advanced legislation that would move congressional primaries to Aug. 11, with runoff elections scheduled for Aug. 25. Under the proposal, congressional candidates would file again June 8-15.
State Election Commission Director Conway Belangia warned lawmakers Friday that changing election timelines this late in the process would create major challenges for election offices and voters. More than 6,800 absentee ballots had already been mailed statewide as of Friday, with 260 already returned, according to testimony before the House panel. Belangia also estimated that holding separate congressional primaries in August could cost taxpayers at least $2.2 million statewide, not including county election expenses or costs tied to redistricting itself.
The proposed map could significantly reshape the longtime 6th Congressional District represented by Jim Clyburn, South Carolina’s lone Democratic member of Congress.
During a Sunday interview on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Clyburn dismissed suggestions that redistricting would necessarily threaten his reelection prospects.
“I don't know why people think I could not get reelected if they redistrict South Carolina,” he said. “I have a district that’s about 45 percent African-American. I have no idea what the number will be after the legislature finishes, but whatever that number is, I will be running on my record and America’s promise.”
Clyburn, now serving his 17th term in Congress, also cautioned Republicans against assuming the effort would automatically translate into political gains.
“Be very careful what you pray for,” he said, adding that he believes the final map could create opportunities for more Democratic victories in South Carolina congressional races.
Representative Fawn Pedalino, R-District 64, said she believes communities within the current 6th Congressional District would benefit from different representation regardless of whether the proposed redistricting plan ultimately moves forward.
“I personally believe the current 6th Congressional District, or as many people commonly refer to it, the ‘Corridor of Shame,’ deserves real representation, and I hope we get it.”
Pedalino also described the current district boundaries as “pieced together” and irregularly shaped. She said the proposed map “appears cleaner and more reflective of dividing the state into seven congressional districts.”
Questions about timing have become a major part of the statewide debate, particularly as absentee ballots have already been mailed and early voting is set to begin later this month.
Even while supporting the broader redistricting discussion, Pedalino acknowledged the proposal is surfacing very close to the June primaries.
“Do I think the timing is the best for making this decision with the fact that it is so close to the primary? No, I don't,” Pedalino said.
Pedalino also pushed back on suggestions that voters would struggle to adapt if election dates ultimately change.
“I think it could be perceived as condescending to insinuate that South Carolina voters are going to be confused,” Pedalino said. “I believe the overwhelming majority of people across this state are very engaged and informed about what is taking place.”
Senator Jeff Zell, R-District 36, said he supports continuing congressional redistricting discussions after the legislative session ends, though he stressed he is not committed to any specific proposed map. He framed the debate less around partisan outcomes and more around competitiveness and representation, arguing that districts should reflect communities rather than protect incumbents.
“Gerrymandered districts undermine the principle that offices should never feel so safe that ideas are not sufficiently challenged,” Zell said. “True representation comes from fair, competitive lines that reflect communities rather than protect incumbents.”
Zell also said lawmakers have an obligation to address districts they believe may be unconstitutional or disenfranchise voters, regardless of political consequences.
“Whether it’s school boards or congressional districts, candidates should have to earn the trust and votes of the people they serve,” he said.
Unlike Pedalino, Zell said concerns about voter confusion are valid given the timing of the discussions and already-low turnout rates. He said any added uncertainty surrounding election dates could discourage participation if changes are not communicated clearly to voters.
“Yes, I am concerned about voter confusion — turnout is already abysmally low, and anything that adds uncertainty only makes participation harder,” Zell said. “We need to make our elections as clear and accessible as possible.”
The proposal’s future now rests with the South Carolina Senate, where lawmakers are expected to debate the measure in the coming days. The resolution requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
When asked whether supporters currently have enough votes to move the effort forward, Senator Jeff Zell, R-District 36, said the answer remains unclear.
“That’s the million dollar question,” Zell said. “From what I’m hearing, people are all over the place. There’s real concern about the impact of any changes and the unintended consequences that could follow.”
