Journal of Political Science Volume 27 Number 1 Article 3 November 1999 Every Which Way and Loose: The Changing Suburban and Urban South Carolina Electorates Chris Grant Jon Baggett Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/jops Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Grant, Chris and Baggett, Jon (1999) "Every Which Way and Loose: The Changing Suburban and Urban South Carolina Electorates," Journal of Political Science: Vol. 27 : No. 1 , Article 3. Available at: https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/jops/vol27/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Politics at CCU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Political Science by an authorized editor of CCU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Every Which Way and Loose: The Changing Suburban and Urban South Caro­ lina Electorates Chris Grant Presbyterian College Jon Baggett Presbyterian College Our paper explores the changing nature of th e South Car olina electorate . Once seen as an emerging bastion for the GOP in the South , the South Carolina electorat e rece ntly has shown a surprising propensit y for electing demo crats . Part of the democrats ' resurgence can be at ­ tribu ted to changes in suburban and urban voting pat­ terns. Our paper identifies demographic and regional tren ds that hav e contributed to the rekindling of th e Demo cratic Part y in South Carolina . Special attention is given to th e elections of 1996 and 1998 . INT RODUCTION n the Spring of 1997 it seemed a venerable Senate career would come to a close shortly in South Carolina. It was not Ithat the state's senior Senator, at age ninety-six, was consid­ ering resignation . Rather, it was the state's junior Senator, Fritz Hollings, who looked like one of the most vulnerable democratic incumbents in country. Moreover, the incumbent Republican governor seemed a sure bet for reelection, in spite of a series of political gaffs. Why did a widely respected Senator seem doomed and a weak governor seem to be riding high? Had the South Carolina electorate realigned to the point that democrats THE JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE VOLUME 27 1999 PAGES 53 -78 54 GRANT AND BAGGETT could no longer win? A great deal of recent research on South Carolina had shown phenomenal strength for the GOP. Accord­ ing to polling by Whit Ayers in 1997, fewer than 10% of white males in the state called themselves democrats (Bullock 1998). Yet, the surprising result of the 1998 elections was that the Democrats had their best showing of the decade. Hollings held his vulnerable U.S. Senate seat, increasing his electoral margin from 1992, and Jim Hodges became the first Democrat to win the governor 's mansion since 1982. The reversal in electoral fortunes raises questions as to whether the 1998 election is an aberration or a shift in electoral trends. We seek to shed light on this question with an examination of regional, demographic, and national trends as well as the changing nature of urban and sub­ urban voters that may have produced unanticipated electoral out­ comes. Chart 1 provides an overall diagram of democratic strength over the last thirty years in South Carolina. Democratic CHART 1 Democratic Vote Shares in South Carolina , 1966-1998 75 ~-- - -,,.------- ---.;- ~----- - ~ .. -+- Holhngs 0 t 50+.-"=---~- -- -,=,,- _.:::,,..-Z~ =--! -.- Democratagainst Th urmond 0 _...,_ Democratic Gubcnatorial = Candidate .....~ 2S +---- - ----- ----< -e- Average Democratic Vote ~ 0 U) 0 ... .., N U) 0 ... .., U) ... ... ... .., .., 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, ~ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, - - - Year- - - - - strength is measured by percentage of the vote garnered in high­ profile state elections (Governor and U.S. Senate) and the trend line estimates the share of the vote taken by Democrats in the preceding elections for statewide office. THE JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE CHANGINGSUBURBAN / URBANS.C. ELECTORATE 55 After solid showings in the 1970s and 1980s, Democrats remained below the 50% mark until 1998, as the "Average Democratic Vote" line in Chart 1 shows. The low point for the Democrats came in 1994, the year of the Republican takeover of Congress. The Democrats came back from 1994 with a small percentage increase in 1996. In both the elections of 1996 and 1998, it appears that there is a winnowing of the margins of Re­ publican victory, perhaps signaling an end to partisan realign­ ment and the emergence of a more competitive Democratic Party. ENVIRONMENT OF ELECTORAL POLITICS Geographic Regions. South Carolina is divided into four distinct regions with unique social and geographic characteris­ tics: the Low Country, Pee Dee, Midlands, and Upstate. Map 1 illustrates the four regions and major cities in the regions. Coun­ ties comprising the state's five 1995 Metropolitan Statistical Ar­ eas are shaded. The Low Country is the area of the state where the first Anglo settlers arrived and where the majority of African slaves were settled. 1 The Low Country is also distinctive because of its ethnic and economic history. In colonial times the region was a proprietary colony and was by far the wealthiest region in the colonies. Because of its agrarian roots, there has always been a heavy concentration of African-Americans in the region. Art oddity of the region is a small French Huguenot population that was the target of Republican appeals by at least one recent elec­ toral strategist. Nonetheless, politically the area has been the 1 In fact, 40% of all Africans brought as slaves to the colonies (and later to the U.S.) ar­ rived through Charleston (Edgar 1998). VOL. 27 1999 56 GRANT AND BAGGETT most reliably democratic region of the state. The city of Charleston serves as the urban hub for the region 's sole MSA. The Pee Dee region is in the northeastern part of the state and has historically been the poorest region. It is swampy and famous for its rivers flowing with "black water." Employ­ ment in agriculture is more prevalent in the Pee Dee than in other MAP 1 South Carolina Regions, Cities, and 1995 MSAs MetropolitanStat istical Areas are shaded. MSA city centers are labeled. regions of the state. Education attainment and urbanization levels are low in comparison to the other regions. The traditional hub of the region has been the City of Florence. Both Horry and Flor- THE JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE CHANGING SUBURBAN /U RBAN S. C. ELECTORATE 57 ence Counties comprise separate metropolitan statistical areas anchored by the cities of Myrtle Beach and Florence, respec­ tively. Less of the population of the Pee Dee resides in a MSA than in any other part of the state. Horry County, home to Myrtle Beach and the "Grand Strand" with its booming tourism based economy, has been the fastest growing urban county in the entire state. Recently, there has been some optimism about growth in Florence County as some new industrial residents have come to the area. The region has been less solidly democratic than the Low Country but still has been more reliable for the Democrats than have other regions. The partisan divide in the region tends to be alonf racial lines with African-Americans supportive of Democrats and whites demonstrating a propensity for voting Republican. In the center of the state is the Midlands region. The largest city is Columbia, the state capital. The Columbia MSA encompasses Richland County and fast growing and largely sub­ urban Lexington County. Two other urban areas are in the Mid­ lands. The Sumter MSA encompasses the county of the same name and is the MSA with the slowest projected growth in the state. Ailcen County, which is apart of the Augusta, Georgia MSA, is also suburban. Geologically, a fall line runs through the Midlands and some of the richest soil in the state is in the region. During colonial times, Germans settled in the Midlands and a distinct cultural legacy exists, evident in the numerous Lutheran congregations in the northern counties of the region. Politically, the region is a mixture of partisans. State workers around Co­ lumbia have leaned toward the Democrats while the engineers of Aiken County make it amongst the most reliably Republican counties in the state. 2Congressman Jim Clyburn who was elected from a specially drawn minority-majority district represents the bulk of the Pee Dee in the House. VOL. 27 1999 58 GRANT AND BAGGETT The Upstate region covers the upper third of the state and contains about one-third of the state's population. It is hilly and mountainous. The terrain was first homesteaded by hearty yet poor Scots-Irish settlers who came down the Appalachian Trial. After settling the land, they had little contact with the prosperous planters along the coast (Edgar 1998). The planters, in turn, isolated Upstaters from colonial politics both apportion­ ing them few seats in legislative bodies and locating polling sta­ tions far from them. These events led to an historical detachment for Upstate voters from the politics of the rest of the state and a once-intense rivalry with the Low Country. In the latter years of the nineteenth century, textile mills came to region creating rap­ idly growing mill cities and increasing the region 's voter rolls. In the 1890s, the Upstate first showed political potency with the election of "Pitchfork " Ben Tillman. Tillman ran for statewide office numerous times uniting race-baiting demagoguery with populist farm policies . The region has been much more impor­ tant in the twentieth century with Republicans making initial in­ roads among the counties that line the border with North Carolina. Recently, Carroll Campbell 's governorship symbolized, to some extent, a Republican Upstate ascendancy.