Utah House passes bill tightening rules on automated calls and faxes; debate over administrative fines

The Utah House on Jan. 22 passed HB96, the Telephone and Facsimile Solicitation Act, sending the measure to the Senate after a 60–13 vote. Sponsors and supporters said the bill brings state law into harmony with federal rules and gives consumers additional protection against unwanted automated phone calls and facsimiles.

Representative Hudson Hunsaker, the bill sponsor, said the amendment package recognizes that “caller identification service is available and may not be blocked” and aligns state private-action provisions with federal requirements. He told colleagues the bill will help curb automated systems that can mask identification and harass residents.

A lengthy debate focused on whether the bill’s administrative-enforcement provisions — which allow the Division of Consumer Protection to impose administrative fines and other remedies — shift too much power from courts to executive agencies. Representative Kathleen Howard moved to delete lines that would authorize administrative fines, arguing that the change “delegates the judicial power to the agency” and risks eroding due process protections. She warned that administrative proceedings use a lower standard of proof and that citizens could find it prohibitively expensive to vindicate rights in court.

Supporters of the bill’s enforcement mechanism said administrative remedies are necessary to act quickly against bad actors. Representative (unnamed) argued that relying only on criminal prosecution would clog courts and leave consumers unprotected while scams proliferated. Backers emphasized that the Administrative Procedures Act provides appeal rights, including agency review and a trial de novo in district court.

The specific amendment to strip the administrative-penalty language failed on a recorded vote (34–37). After proponents summarized the bill’s purpose, the House approved HB96 by a 60–13 margin and forwarded it to the Senate.

What happens next: HB96 goes to the Utah Senate for consideration. The House debate highlighted a standing tension in oversight policy: balancing speed and consumer protection against procedural safeguards and separation-of-powers concerns.

Quotes in context: “This recognizes that the caller identification service is available and may not be blocked,” Hunsaker said of his amendment. “If we take this out, they can still issue cease and desist orders, they can still notify people that they’re in violation, they can still prosecute,” Kathleen Howard said while arguing to preserve judicial processes.

Procedural note: The discussion included multiple references to the Utah Administrative Procedures Act and to existing federal statutes governing telemarketing and facsimile solicitation. The House recorded the amendment and final votes in the journal.