Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tobacco Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House adopts model statute to protect Utah’s tobacco settlement funds
Summary
The House passed a second substitute to H.B.132, adopting the model non‑participating‑manufacturer escrow provisions intended to protect Utah’s share of the national tobacco settlement; supporters argued it is insurance against market‑share losses, 59–15.
SALT LAKE CITY — The House on March 1 approved a second substitute to H.B.132 that implements model language for nonparticipating tobacco manufacturers and escrow payments, a step sponsors said is necessary to protect Utah’s projected settlement revenue.
Representative Patrice Arendt introduced the measure and explained the model provisions require manufacturers that did not join the national settlement to either participate or make annual escrow deposits based on cigarettes sold in Utah. The legislation aims to prevent nonparticipating companies from undercutting settled manufacturers’ market share and thereby reducing states’ settlement payments.
Representative Derek Curtis and other sponsors said the language mirrors the master settlement agreement already filed in federal court; proponents argued that without an exact model statute, Utah risks reductions to its settlement payments if market share shifts to nonparticipating manufacturers.
Critics asked whether the settlement produced meaningful public-health gains, raised concerns about attorney fees and federal claims on the pot, and questioned whether the state needed a court-driven settlement rather than legislative steps. Sponsors replied the vote was practical protection of the state’s financial interest: Representative Curtis said the escrow approach ensures that a nonparticipating manufacturer will have funds available to meet any future claims.
After discussion, the House passed the second substitute, 59–15. The sponsors noted that definitions and core provisions were negotiated as part of the national settlement and the state bill is intended only to adopt those model statutory terms so Utah does not lose settlement funds to market-share changes elsewhere.
Next steps: the bill is transmitted to the Senate for concurrence; if enacted it will require reporting by manufacturers and monitoring by state agencies.
