Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bingo Modernization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel weighs 'American Heroes Bingo' electronic license; veterans praise funding, charities and promoters warn of revenue loss and video‑poker comeback
Summary
H.4137 would create a Class G electronic 'American Heroes' bingo license that dedicates 15% of net hold to the Veterans Trust Fund and 10% to three veterans organizations. Supporters said it modernizes fundraising for small posts; opponents said it diverts funds from many charities, resembles server‑based video poker, and could reduce existing charity rebates. The committee carried the bill over for further drafting and fiscal review.
Get email alerts on the Bingo Modernization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The subcommittee took extended testimony on H.4137, the "American Heroes Bingo" bill proposing a new Class G electronic bingo license for veterans organizations and a redistribution of proceeds.
Committee staff explained that the bill creates new definitions (veterans trust fund, veterans organization, American Heroes bingo, location‑based server, electronic bingo aids and net hold) and authorizes a Class G license for veterans groups. The bill would limit prize size per game, cap weekly sessions, permit a modest admission fee, and direct 15% of monthly net hold to the Veterans Trust Fund with 10% of net hold split equally among the South Carolina headquarters of the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the Disabled American Veterans. The bill also allows certain large veteran organizations to submit claims for proceeds.
Supporters — primarily veterans organizations and proponents — argued the bill modernizes charitable fundraising, helps small and rural posts that have seen fundraising decline, and would channel funds to veterans'services. Keith Gray, who said he was involved in drafting the bill on behalf of HB Holdings, described the system as a "responsible modernization" that keeps a manual ball draw visible to players while using terminals for accounting and payouts. Supporters, including multiple local post commanders, said the Veterans Trust Fund board and secretary would play roles in appropriation and approvals.
Opponents — bingo promoters, long‑standing class B/C operators, and charity representatives — said the bill would upend the existing charitable‑bingo ecosystem. Dale Jones, local chapter president of the Midlands Fraternal Order of Police, said the bill creates an uneven playing field that would favor current operators and eliminate opportunities for other nonprofits. David Hewitt, treasurer of the North Augusta Satoma Club, described an impact statement the fiscal affairs office prepared and warned that money currently funding senior programs and other state distributions (the current statutorily defined shares) could be redirected to veterans accounts with no guarantee of replacement for those other programs.
Concerns centered on four issues: (1) whether the machines and server‑based terminals are effectively a return of server‑based video‑poker, (2) whether the bill improperly directs money away from existing beneficiaries (current bingo statutes return 28% to sponsoring charities and allocate the remainder among several state funds), (3) how many posts or locations would deploy the devices and what the startup and operating costs would be, and (4) the commercial revenue split between manufacturers/promoters and the post/operator. Promoters estimated device costs at roughly $5,000 per terminal and suggested the operating model could leave posts with only about 10–15% of net hold after manufacturer/operating costs.
Stakeholders offered a proposed amendment to allow existing B and C license holders to apply for a Class G license (with certain two‑year operation requirements) so that current operators are not excluded, and requested staff refine language governing tax splits, licensing, and whether non‑veteran nonprofits could opt in. After extended public comment and cross‑questions, the committee voted to carry the bill over and asked staff to work with stakeholders on the draft amendment and fiscal questions.
Next steps: the subcommittee will ask staff to finalize amendment language, collect fiscal impact estimates, and reconvene before sending the measure to the full committee.
