Subcommittee advances bill to expand veterans’ dependent tuition access after parent testimony

A South Carolina Senate subcommittee voted to advance Bill 3453 after hearing testimony about how the bill’s residency rules affect children of injured veterans.

Presenter staff summarized the measure, which would expand in‑state tuition eligibility to dependents of honorably discharged or retired service members and clarify residency definitions. The staff presenter said an amendment added in the House (Section 2) is in the binder and the committee proposed removing that section because stakeholders flagged uncertain fiscal and operational impacts.

Laurie Campbell, who said she lives in Columbia and identified herself as the mother of twin daughters, told the committee the bill’s current residency requirement — which requires both the veteran and the child to have lived in South Carolina for at least one year — can exclude children who have been resident their whole lives when a veteran’s whereabouts are unknown. "We read the bill more closely and discovered that the current iteration of the bill requires that both the veteran and the children live in South Carolina for a year before attending college," Campbell said. She described family disruptions after a service member was diagnosed with traumatic brain injury and PTSD and said the statute, as written, could deny anticipated benefits to dependent children.

Committee members discussed limiting expanded eligibility to veterans with certain service‑connected disabilities; the presenter noted that the House amendment had broadened eligibility to include retired personnel and a wider set of dependents, and the committee placed an amendment in the binder to remove the contested section. A motion to adopt the revised report was made and seconded; the subcommittee voted in favor and "the ayes have it." The bill will move forward to the next stage of consideration.

The committee did not complete a fiscal analysis during the hearing; members noted letters from stakeholders raising cost concerns. No final cost estimate was provided at the hearing.