A bill supporters say would help increase the number of black judges statewide died Thursday on the last day of the legislative session.

The S.C. House refused to accept a Senate version that had passed Wednesday. Rep. Greg Delleney, R-Chester, recommended before Thursday’s voice vote that the House and Senate versions — which differed significantly — be sent to a conference committee to work out a compromise.

But a conference committee wasn’t appointed Thursday because of a lack of time. That means the bill will have to go through the entire legislative process next year if it is reintroduced.

Rep. Leon Howard, D-Richland, sponsor of the House bill, said Thursday that although he preferred his bill over the Senate version, he had hoped the House would accept the Senate’s changes.

“I don’t believe the General Assembly is serious about diversity on the bench,” said Howard, who is black. “The General Assembly took this opportunity to sidestep a problem that’s not going to go away.”

Howard’s bill would have eliminated the three-person cap on the number of nominated candidates for Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, administrative law, circuit and family court seats. The Senate version would have raised the cap to six.

Black lawmakers contend the cap has prevented black candidates from getting nominated and has discouraged others from running. Candidates are nominated by the 10-member Judicial Merit Selection Commission, made up mostly of state lawmakers. Judges are elected by the Legislature.

A study earlier this year by The State newspaper found South Carolina’s top courts are among the least diverse in the nation when compared with the overall black state population. Ten percent of the state’s circuit and appellate judges are black; the state’s black population is about 30 percent.

Howard said he would ask House Speaker David Wilkins, R-Greenville, and Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston, to appoint a task force to draft a new bill over the summer so it could be introduced next year.

Delleney, a lawyer who is the judicial screening committee chairman, said after Thursday’s vote that he favors eliminating the cap.

“That way, no one can say that we’re not reporting them out because of their gender or race,” said Delleney, who is white.

A study published last month by The State found that since 1998, the screening committee has failed to nominate two-thirds of black candidates in contested races with more than three candidates. About half of white candidates in those races were not nominated.

Delleney said he didn’t believe the Senate version of the bill “went far enough.” He added, though, that he had not talked in depth about the issue with McConnell, the screening committee vice chairman who helped shape the Senate version.

Efforts to reach McConnell on Thursday were unsuccessful.

Another screening committee member, Rep. Fletcher Smith, D-Greenville, said Thursday he would not support changing the House version, which included a controversial amendment that would have eliminated a one-year waiting period for legislators wanting to run for judgeships.

Critics say the amendment would give lawmakers an unfair advantage. But Smith, a black lawyer, disagreed, explaining that lawmakers would have to go through the same nominating process as other candidates.

Reach Brundrett at (803) 771-8484 or rbrundrett@thestate.com.