
US Senate Hopeful Annie Andrews Says Lindsey Graham 'Corrupt As Ever'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Democrat Annie Andrews is running for a U.S. Senate seat in South Carolina, attempting to challenge four-term Republican incumbent Senator Lindsey Graham in November 2026. She spoke with Newsweek, saying she entered the race because Graham is as "corrupt as ever."
Who Is Annie Andrews?
Andrews, a mother of three, has spent her entire career working in hospitals—including 15 years at the children's hospital in the low country of South Carolina.
She said she never originally planned to pivot into politics. But the day-to-day personal experiences she sees in her line of work encouraged her to do more.
"What I see every day at the children's hospital is the effects of broken policies coming out of Washington, D.C." Andrews said. "I realize that they're harming kids and families long before they ever got to me at the hospital."
Democrat Annie Andrews, right, is pictured with longtime Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, left.
Democrat Annie Andrews, right, is pictured with longtime Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, left.
Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty/AP/Canva
Andrews alluded to children who are hungry and unaware of where their next meal will come from; kids who are in the throes of mental-health crises but can't access proper resources; those who are being diagnosed with new chronic diseases and their parents don't know if they can afford prescription drugs; and children who have been shot.
"Once I understood that the system was failing our kids, I started to look upstream and I realized that it's because corrupt career politicians like Lindsey Graham are more than willing to sell our kids out if it means they can hold on to power," Andrews said.
Learning From Losing
This is not her first foray in politics.
Andrews ran for Congress in 2022 and faced off against South Carolina Representative Nancy Mace. Andrews lost by 14 percentage points.
But she "learned a lot," she said, and felt that her voice stemming from a long medical background is influential in a time when some lawmakers are proposing "gutting Medicaid," the largest insurer for children, cutting Medicare, or slashing funds for the National Institutes of Health.
"Folks like me need to step up and fight back because what's happening is going to take decades for us to recover from," Andrews said. "But I learned that it's important to run, no matter how steep the odds are. It's important to run and to fight for what you believe in and to give voters a choice, and to let voters see that someone is willing to fight for them and deliver results that will actually help your constituents."
Going Toe-To-Toe With Lindsey Graham
Keeping Graham's seat is vital for the GOP as 33 of 100 Senate seats are being contested on November 3, 2026. Of those, 20 are currently held by Republicans.
Andrews said Graham does his bidding in Washington and "doesn't even bother to hold town halls in South Carolina because he's only there to please Trump and to please billionaires and his corporate donors and special interest groups."
"Graham has been in the Senate for 22 years, which is exactly half of my lifetime," she said. "And over that time period, he has changed his position on nearly every issue because he doesn't stand for anything other than what will allow him to keep power."
Andrews cited a Winthrop University poll of general population South Carolinians conducted in late May shows Graham's approval ratings trailing Republican figures such as Trump (45 percent), South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster (42 percent) and Senator Tim Scott (41 percent). Graham's rating is 34 percent.
About 40 percent of respondents disapprove with how Graham is handing his duties, compared to 34 percent who approve and 25 percent who said they weren't sure.
Abby Zilch, press secretary for Graham's campaign, told Newsweek on Thursday that the poll carries little if any weight.
"The more effective you are in helping enact President Trump's agenda, the more Democrats want to take you down," Zilch said. "While Dr. Andrews pushes a radical liberal agenda that is out of touch with South Carolina, Senator Graham has always stood firm for conservative values—cutting taxes, securing the border, protecting the right to life, defending the 2nd Amendment, and confirming conservative judges to protect our freedoms."
Andrews, however, said the poll numbers iterate how the Palmetto State really feels about the 69-year-old Graham, who was first elected in 2003 and won his last Senate race in 2020 by 10 points against Democrat Jaime Harrison.
"He's more unpopular than ever because he's more corrupt than ever," Andrews said. "The 2026 election cycle is going to be very different from 2020 for a lot of reasons."
For one, she said that it is not a presidential election year and that Graham "doesn't have Donald Trump on the ballot to save him."
Andrews said that the COVID-19 pandemic also impacted campaigning, preventing traditional door knocking operations and the like. The lack of a field operation won't be a barrier.
"People are really feeling the negative impacts of the chaos and corruption coming out of D.C. that Lindsey Graham has enabled every single step of the way in a way that they haven't before," Andrews said.
"I live in the low country right near the South Carolina ports. Whether it's the ports and Trump's chaotic tariffs harming the ports, South Carolina small-business owners, South Carolina farmers, South Carolina's auto industry—it is affecting people in ways that it never has."
Turning a Red State Blue
Asked about the political makeup of her state and the challenges that come from voter demographics that have routinely voted for Republicans over Democrats in most recent election cycles, Andrews said she doesn't look at voters as being "red or blue."
She added that she intends to talk to voters statewide and tell her story, about being a doctor and explaining many of the horrors she routinely sees on the job. As Andrews listens to concerned children and parents and provides solutions, she wants to relay a similar message in the political arena for a litany of issues.
"I think you have to show up where they are," Andrews said. "You have to go to their communities and sit down and talk face-to-face with voters. It's very different from being on social-media platforms where people say horrific things to me and others every day.
"When you're face-to-face with someone, you realize you have a shared humanity and conversations evolve and folks are open minded."
Liberal Ideology
Andrews says she has never taken a political-science class, nor does she view herself as a "moderate" or "progressive" Democrat. Labels aren't her thing.
She doesn't view herself as political just because she is trying to be a lawmaker, saying that the goal is to help people and make their lives better than they are now.
"I identify as a Democrat because they're the ones who are fighting for their kids, for our kids," Andrews said. "They're the ones who are fighting to pass an expanded permanent child tax credit. They're the ones who are trying to preserve and protect Medicaid. They're the ones who want to pass common-sense gun laws so that gun violence is no longer the leading cause of death for children in this country. They're the ones who want child care to be more affordable, prescription drugs to be more affordable.
"I identify as a Democrat because I see them every day, fighting for kids and families," Andrews said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Big Beautiful Bill Looks To Reverse Affordable Care Act Coverage Gains
The House budget reconciliation bill, dubbed the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' includes large cuts in Medicaid spending that could lead to millions of newly uninsured individuals if the legislation passes in the Senate. The proposed law also contains provisions that alter the Affordable Care Act exchange landscape, potentially leading to millions more uninsured. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that at least five million current marketplace enrollees would lose coverage by 2034. The nonpartisan and policy research firm KFF says the number of people with marketplace plans could shrink even more, by around eight million. Changes in the ACA marketplace would make coverage more expensive, as enhanced tax credits expire, and harder to obtain as open enrollment windows shorten, the paperwork burden for beneficiaries increases and automatic re-enrollment ends. Americans who purchase health coverage through the ACA marketplace exchanges could also soon face higher out-of-pocket maximums in their coverage plans, which means higher cost-sharing. The United States Treasury Department announced in Sept. 2024 that almost 50 million people have obtained healthcare coverage through marketplace exchanges created by the ACA since its enactment more than a decade ago. The Department data show that one in seven Americans have been or are covered by the law. And between President Biden's inauguration in Jan. 2021 and Sept. 2024, 18.2 million Americans got ACA coverage for the first time. Rising enrollment since 2021 has been driven by an expansion under the Biden Administration of premium tax credits to include individuals and families with household incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty level, which equates to $58,000 for a single person and $120,000 for a family of four. Republican lawmakers in both the House and Senate, in concert with the Trump administration, are now looking to reverse some of those gains. The ACA has gone through a tumultuous history since it was signed in 2010. The law has faced repeated calls for repeal by Republicans. For several years following its passage it wasn't a particularly well-liked piece of legislation, Yet the ACA is now more popular than ever, with over 60% of the public having a favorable view of the law, according to KFF. The ACA is a comprehensive reform bill, passed by Congress in 2010, that increases health insurance coverage for the uninsured and implements a wide range of reforms to the health insurance market as well as an expansion of Medicaid, the public insurance program that provides health coverage to low-income families and individuals. Importantly, under the ACA, individuals who may have been uninsured due to preexisting conditions or limited finances can secure affordable health plans through the health insurance marketplaces established by the law. The demographics of people on Medicaid are fairly similar to those enrolled in ACA plans. The legislation has its critics. They point to certain flaws in design and implementation, Indeed, in the early years under the Obama Administration, insurers exited in droves and premiums rates increased substantially. Under the first Trump administration, ACA enrollment fell overall while numbers of uninsured rose by more than two million. Following unsuccessful efforts to scuttle the ACA, the president issued executive orders to 'improve ACA market dynamics.' ACA exchanges did stabilize in the latter half of Trump's first term as insurers returned and the rate of premium growth decreased. When Biden assumed office, his administration sought to enlarge the ACA program and counter several of the changes implemented by the first Trump administration that had shrunk its size. The Biden administration was largely successful in terms of increasing the number of people who signed up in the ACA exchanges and reducing the percentage of Americans without health insurance. Troubled times for folks enrolled in the ACA exchanges aren't solely because of possible passage of the budget reconciliation bill. CVS Health announced last month it will pull Aetna out of the ACA marketplace in 2026, leaving about one million people across 17 states searching for new healthcare coverage. Aetna's withdrawal from the marketplace will mark the second time the carrier stepped away from the ACA exchanges. The company left the ACA marketplace in 2018 and came back in 2022. Other carriers left the individual health insurance marketplace in 2017 and 2018 amid uncertainty over whether the ACA would be repealed or replaced. While there isn't the same kind of uncertainty now regarding the ACA's survival, disruption is occurring in the space. This could soon lead to more carriers exiting the market.


Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Paxton presents an opportunity in Texas — if Democrats can take advantage of it
Texas Republicans' messy Senate primary is giving Democrats hope that they could finally have an opening to wedge into higher office in the red state — for real this time. But a potential pileup of candidates as the party sees renewed interest in the race could spoil their chances of finally flipping the Lone Star State. Attorney General Ken Paxton, who endured multiple scandals while in office, is leading in the polls against longtime incumbent GOP Sen. John Cornyn. A Paxton victory could divide Republicans and potentially even sway some to support a Democrat. Nearly two dozen Texas Democratic members of Congress, party leaders and strategists described a sense of opportunity, but were divided on the type of candidate to run. Some argued for a progressive, others thought a more centrist candidate could gain traction, while others weren't even sure Democrats could pull off a win. There are calls both for new blood and for a proven candidate. Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Texas) just wants a candidate who'd 'sound like a Texas Democrat' and could buck national trends.. 'I think this is just a great opportunity for Democrats, and we don't need to blow it,' said Veasey, who said he isn't interested in a run. Flipping Texas is a perennial Democratic dream, but core constituencies have moved further to the right, and Democrats haven't held a Senate seat in the state since 1993. The state's expensive media markets require fundraising prowess. That leaves the party with a crowded field of interested candidates, but none with a proven track record of winning statewide. Plenty of Democrats are skeptical they'd even win against Paxton, whose nomination isn't guaranteed. 'I am hopeful that [Cornyn] could pull it off, because if you're going to have a Republican in Texas, why not let it be John,' said Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas). Democrats acknowledge they'd stand little chance of unseating Cornyn, who's been a fixture in Texas politics for decades. But Paxton, a Trump loyalist who was impeached by the Republican-held Texas House (and acquitted in the impeachment trial) and faced a federal corruption investigation, has been a polarizing figure in the Texas GOP, and, Democrats hope, an opponent they could defeat. 'Democrats are foaming at the mouth about Ken Paxton,' said Katherine Fischer, deputy executive director of Texas Majority PAC, which works to elect Democrats statewide. 'We're seeing in local elections in Texas and across the country there is already a backlash against Trump and against MAGA. Ken Paxton is about as MAGA as you can get.' First they need to find a viable Senate candidate. After coming up short in previous cycles, many Texas Democrats are hesitant about supporting former Reps. Colin Allred and Beto O'Rourke, both of whom have signaled their interest in another bid. O'Rourke, who unsuccessfully ran statewide in 2018 and 2022, has been hosting packed town halls across the state. Allred, who lost to Sen. Ted Cruz in 2024 by about 8.5 percentage points, has said he was 'seriously considering' another run. 'Well, [Allred and O'Rourke are] both talking about it, and I hope that they will resolve that one person's running and not all,' said Rep. Lloyd Doggett. Allred's failed campaign has left a bad taste among some Texans, especially progressives, who believe he did not run aggressively or do enough grassroots outreach. And while O'Rourke is still a favorite son in Texas Democratic circles, many of those supporters believe he will be haunted by his position against assault rifles in a gun-loving state. 'They both tried it, and especially the last time, the margins were pretty wide,' said Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-Texas). 'And I think those are all things to consider.' Joel Montfort, a Texas-based Democratic strategist, agreed: 'Putting the same two guys up over and over, I don't think that's going to deliver us.' That's why some say it's time to try something new. Texas Democrats have talked up potential bids by state Rep. James Talarico, the Democratic seminarian and frequently viral member who helped prosecute Paxton during his impeachment. Talarico told POLITICO: 'I'm having conversations about how I can best serve Texas, and that includes the Senate race. But in my training as a pastor, you learn the importance of listening and how hard it is to truly listen. With so much at stake for Texas, I'm trying to listen more than I talk right now.' His potential candidacy is generating some interest from players who have run successful upstart campaigns. 'It's going to take a Democrat who can make the case against Washington D.C., the status quo, and the powers that to be to win a senate race in Texas,' said Andrew Mamo, a veteran of Pete Buttigieg's presidential campaign who is informally advising Talarico. 'James is one of the rare people in the party with the profile and most importantly the storytelling skills to get that done.' State Sen. Nathan Johnson, a Dallas lawyer, is in the mix but he's also eyeing a run for attorney general. Some party insiders privately worry a state lawmaker won't bring the necessary firepower, saying they need to find a candidate with experience running statewide — or at least someone who represents Texas in Congress — due to the sheer amount of resources required to compete in the second-largest state. Veasey and fellow Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro have both been talked up as potential candidates, though Veasey in an interview ruled out a run. A person close to Castro said he was actively looking at the race. While Democrats across the nation believe backlash against President Donald Trump's unpopular agenda like his DOGE cuts and trade war will help in the midterms, the Democratic dream of winning Texas — which once seemed like only a matter of time — now feels farther away. The party's coalition problems are on stark display in South Texas, where Latino-heavy border districts like Gonzalez's shifted dramatically toward Trump. Gonzalez and other Democrats have been warning of their party's need to reverse their fortunes with Latino voters. 'There is work to be done on Latino erosion,' said Tory Gavito, an Austin-based Democratic strategist. 'There is work to be done to make sure infrastructure is incredibly sound in places like Houston and Dallas and San Antonio and South Texas.' Progressive Democrats are eager to back a candidate who runs to the left of Allred, based on their belief that working-class voters can be brought back to the party with a populist economic message. 'We've got to have somebody run who's going to be willing to go travel the state, and connect with a diverse set of working-class voters,' said Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas). 'In Texas, people are looking for somebody that's authentic and real, willing to tell it like it is, that's going to energize our base, but then bring a lot of disaffected voters back to the polls.' Allred is widely seen by Texas Democrats as the preferred candidate of Washington, and some said they're tired of out-of-state consultants in their backyard. 'We don't want people from D.C. telling Texans what to do,' said Nancy Thompson, a Democratic activist and founder of Mothers Against Greg Abbott. A strong contingent of the party, however, believes that running too far to the left would blow up their chances in what remains a socially conservative state. 'You have to have real candidates that are willing to sound like everyday Texans,' said Veasey. 'Being part of the national team will get your ass killed.'

Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
South Dakota is on track to spend $2 billion on prisons in the next decade
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — Two years after approving a tough-on-crime sentencing law, South Dakota is scrambling to deal with the price tag for that legislation: Housing thousands of additional inmates could require up to $2 billion to build new prisons in the next decade. That's a lot of money for a state with one of the lowest populations in the U.S., but a consultant said it's needed to keep pace with an anticipated 34% surge of new inmates in the next decade as a result of South Dakota's tough criminal justice laws. And while officials are grumbling about the cost, they don't seem concerned with the laws that are driving the need even as national crime rates are dropping. 'Crime has been falling everywhere in the country, with historic drops in crime in the last year or two,' said Bob Libal, senior campaign strategist at the criminal justice nonprofit the Sentencing Project. 'It's a particularly unusual time to be investing $2 billion in prisons.' Some Democratic-led states have worked to close prisons and enact changes to lower inmate populations, but that's a tough sell in Republican-majority states such as South Dakota that believe in a tough-on-crime approach, even if that leads to more inmates. For now, state lawmakers have set aside a $600-million fund to replace the overcrowded 144-year-old South Dakota State Penitentiary in Sioux Falls, making it one of the most expensive taxpayer-funded projects in South Dakota history. But South Dakota will likely need more prisons. Phoenix-based Arrington Watkins Architects, which the state hired as a consultant, has said South Dakota will need 3,300 additional beds in coming years, bringing the cost to $2 billion. Driving up costs is the need for facilities with different security levels to accommodate the inmate population. Concerns about South Dakota's prisons first arose four years ago, when the state was flush with COVID-19 relief funds. Lawmakers wanted to replace the penitentiary, but they couldn't agree on where to put the prison and how big it should be. A task force of state lawmakers assembled by Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden is expected to decide that in a plan for prison facilities this July. Many lawmakers have questioned the proposed cost, but few have called for criminal justice changes that would make such a large prison unnecessary. 'One thing I'm trying to do as the chairman of this task force is keep us very focused on our mission,' said Lt. Gov. Tony Venhuizen. 'There are people who want to talk about policies in the prisons or the administration or the criminal justice system more broadly, and that would be a much larger project than the fairly narrow scope that we have.' South Dakota's incarceration rate of 370 per 100,000 people is an outlier in the Upper Midwest. Neighbors Minnesota and North Dakota have rates of under 250 per 100,000 people, according to the Sentencing Project, a criminal justice advocacy nonprofit. Nearly half of South Dakota's projected inmate population growth can be attributed to a law approved in 2023 that requires some violent offenders to serve the full-length of their sentences before parole, according to a report by Arrington Watkins. When South Dakota inmates are paroled, about 40% are ordered to return to prison, the majority of those due to technical violations such as failing a drug test or missing a meeting with a parole officer. Those returning inmates made up nearly half of prison admissions in 2024. Sioux Falls criminal justice attorney Ryan Kolbeck blamed the high number of parolees returning in part on the lack of services in prison for people with drug addictions. 'People are being sent to the penitentiary but there's no programs there for them. There's no way it's going to help them become better people,' he said. 'Essentially we're going to put them out there and house them for a little bit, leave them on parole and expect them to do well.' South Dakota also has the second-greatest disparity of Native Americans in its prisons. While Native Americans make up one-tenth of South Dakota's population, they make up 35% of those in state prisons, according to Prison Policy Initiative, a nonprofit public policy group. Though legislators in the state capital, Pierre, have been talking about prison overcrowding for years, they're reluctant to dial back on tough-on-crime laws. For example, it took repeated efforts over six years before South Dakota reduced a controlled substance ingestion law to a misdemeanor from a felony for the first offense, aligning with all other states. 'It was a huge, Herculean task to get ingestion to be a misdemeanor,' Kolbeck said. Former penitentiary warden Darin Young said the state needs to upgrade its prisons, but he also thinks it should spend up to $300 million on addiction and mental illness treatment. 'Until we fix the reasons why people come to prison and address that issue, the numbers are not going to stop,' he said. Without policy changes, the new prisons are sure to fill up, criminal justice experts agreed. 'We might be good for a few years, now that we've got more capacity, but in a couple years it'll be full again,' Kolbeck said. 'Under our policies, you're going to reach capacity again soon.' Raza writes for the Associated Press.