Bill Would Keep Insurance Abstracts in Local Papers; Insurance Department Offers Statewide Consumer‑notice Alternative

Representative Jim Greenach introduced House Bill 1398 to require the insurance commissioner to distribute required insurance company abstracts so they are published across local newspapers, a practice advocates said has been followed for decades.

Why it matters: Publishers and small‑town newspaper owners told the committee that publishing insurance abstracts supports local transparency and provides meaningful revenue. Cecile Wurman, executive director of the North Dakota Newspaper Association, said the abstracts date to territorial law and that the association and publishers have long distributed abstracts across papers in a judicial district so each community can see the filings.

Publishers’ case: Several small‑town publishers testified about the concrete revenue impact. Art Hegebach, a publisher who owns four weekly papers, said the income from abstracts can amount to tens of thousands of dollars and helps cover essentials such as postage and paper stock; Paul Bridal, a small‑town publisher, said the notices keep citizens informed and local agents and readers can follow corporate filings in their community’s paper.

Regulator’s view and alternative: Deputy Commissioner John Arnold of the insurance department said the statute “clearly states that one newspaper is to be designated by the commissioner in each judicial district.” The department said a recent staff turnover prompted the office to follow the statutory language and assign a single paper in each district, which concentrated those publications in higher‑circulation urban outlets this year. Arnold argued the abstract text offers limited financial information and that the full reports are available online and on request.

To preserve both transparency and an efficient use of public resources, the department proposed an alternative: replace the abstract requirement with a state‑sponsored consumer notification campaign (published in all local papers) explaining the department’s role, how to file a complaint, and how to request full company reports. The department said that approach would reach citizens while avoiding uneven distribution that could result from ad hoc practice.

Committee reaction and next steps: Committee members heard the competing positions and expressed interest in finding a compromise; one member suggested holding the bill for committee work to evaluate options. Representative Koppelman asked for more time to consider whether to change the law to match current practice or to preserve the distribution and revenue for rural papers. The committee agreed to hold the bill for further work and will revisit it in committee sessions.