S.C. Senate Candidate Andrews Shifts Position on Gender Care for Minors
A documented reversal on a high-profile social issue illustrates how Democratic candidates in competitive Senate races are recalibrating on transgender policy ahead of the 2026 midterms.
Annie Andrews, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in South Carolina, released a campaign advertisement this week stating she does not support gender-affirming surgeries for minors, a position that contrasts with her prior public advocacy against a state law restricting such procedures for children, according to reporting by the Washington Examiner.
In the ad, Andrews, who is a licensed pediatrician, addressed voters directly. "Politics can get pretty ugly, and when it does, you deserve to hear the truth," she said in the spot. "So I want you to hear me loud and clear. I don't support biological men playing women's sports, and I don't support and haven't ever" supported gender surgeries for minors, according to the Washington Examiner's account of the advertisement.
The Washington Examiner reported that Andrews previously advocated against a South Carolina state law that restricted gender-affirming medical treatments for minors. The specific bill, its legislative record, and the nature of Andrews's prior advocacy are identified in the Washington Examiner report but the complete text of her prior public statements was not reproduced in the available source material. The full record of her prior advocacy would be contained in South Carolina legislative hearing transcripts, press statements, or media interviews from the period when that legislation was under consideration.
South Carolina is rated as a reliably Republican state in U.S. Senate elections. The current seat is held by Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican who won re-election in 2020 with 54.4 percent of the vote over Democratic challenger Jaime Harrison, according to South Carolina Election Commission certified results. Andrews is challenging in a political environment where Republicans hold a structural advantage in statewide races.
The strategic context for the advertisement is identifiable from public data. Polling on transgender issues in competitive and red-leaning states has consistently shown majorities opposing gender-affirming medical procedures for minors. A 2023 Gallup survey found that 55 percent of U.S. Adults opposed gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, with opposition higher in Southern states. Andrews's advertisement appears calibrated to address that data directly.
The position shift follows a pattern visible in the 2026 midterm cycle among Democratic candidates in competitive districts and states. Several Democratic nominees in Senate and House races have publicly distanced themselves from positions associated with progressive advocacy on transgender issues, particularly as Republican campaign organizations have made the topic a central advertising focus. The precise number of such candidates who have made comparable public statements in the current cycle is not compiled in a single public record, but individual campaign filings and advertising disclosures submitted to the Federal Election Commission and the Federal Communications Commission's political file system would contain that data.
For Andrews specifically, her campaign finance filings with the Federal Election Commission would show the dollar amount spent on the advertisement, the media markets in which it aired, and the dates of the buy. As of the publication of this article, the specific ad buy figures for this advertisement are not available in the source material reviewed.
The South Carolina Senate race is not currently among the seats identified by the Cook Political Report or Sabato's Crystal Ball as a toss-up in the 2026 cycle. Both forecasters rate the seat as safely or likely Republican, which provides the structural backdrop against which Andrews's campaign messaging decisions are being made.
Andrew's dual identity as a physician and a political candidate adds a professional dimension to her public statement. Pediatricians practicing in South Carolina are licensed by the South Carolina Board of Medical Examiners, and their public statements on clinical practice are distinct from legislative advocacy. Whether her prior advocacy was made in her capacity as a private citizen, as a medical professional, or through a formal medical organization is not specified in the available source material. That distinction would be clarified by reviewing any testimony she gave to the South Carolina General Assembly, any letters submitted on professional letterhead, or any organizational affiliations disclosed in her FEC candidate filings.
What remains unknown from available public records is whether Andrews's prior advocacy was made through a formal organization, whether she signed any public letters or petitions as a medical professional on the topic, and the precise text of the campaign advertisement beyond the excerpts reported. The FCC political file for South Carolina television stations would contain the full advertisement once it has aired as a paid political spot, and FEC filings would show the associated expenditure.