H.B. 243 Gambling revsions
0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
LONG TITLE General Description: This bill clarifies the definition of gambling.
Highlighted Provisions: This bill: ▸defines a term; ▸clarifies that a proposition bet falls within the definition of gambling; and ▸makes technical and conforming changes.
Money Appropriated in this Bill: None Other Special Clauses: None Utah Code Sections Affected: AMENDS: 76-9-1401 , as renumbered and amended by Laws of Utah 2025, Chapter 173
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the state of Utah:
If you had to give your own one-sentence version in your own words (no legal-sounding stuff), what would you write—and do you want to click Continue with AI to play with more examples together, or go to Create Document to start your own writing or upload something to work on? You’re working with a couple of different things at once here, so I’ll separate them and then circle back to your question about Sen. Plumb. If you’re trying to understand how Sen. Plumb is likely to think about HB 243, would you like to look up her past votes or public comments on related issues (like gambling, “fringe gambling,” or consumer protection) and then you can jot a quick note or email draft—either by clicking Continue with AI here to talk it out, or by going to Create Document to start your own notes there? You’re asking about a current Utah legislator and a specific bill, so I checked recent, verified sources. Here’s what I can see and what I can’t safely infer: If you’re looking at a specific HB 48 (for example the wildfire WUI bill, or a different HB 48 in another year), what details do you already know about that bill so we can look directly at how she voted or spoke about it, and then you can either click Continue with AI here to keep exploring her record together or go to Create Document to start a note or upload a source you want to annotate? You’ve put a few different things on the table here, so I’ll separate them out. If you want to dig into this further, would you rather (a) look up and interpret her exact votes/statements on HB 243 yourself (I can coach you on how), or (b) start a new document about language and law using your own home language examples—either way you can click Continue with AI here to talk it through more, or go to Create Document to upload a source or start writing?
General Document Comments 0
- You’ve picked an issue that connects to some big, current fights in Utah about what “counts” as gambling, how to protect people from harm, and how much the state should police what happens online and around sports.
- The bill text you pasted fits into Utah’s long‑standing constitutional ban on “any game of chance, lottery or gift enterprise,” and it updates the definitions section of Utah Code 76‑9‑1401 so that things like “proposition bets” can’t hide in gray areas anymore ((Justia, Utah Code §76‑9‑1401, 2025); (Justia, Utah Const. art. VI, §27)).
- Right now, Utah lawmakers are especially focused on: (a) closing loopholes around “fringe gambling” machines and online sweepstakes/skill games, and (b) saying clearly that proposition bets on individual plays, stats, or events during a game are illegal gambling under state law ((Nightingale, Utah prop betting bill, 2026); (Ashcraft, Fringe gambling bill, 2019)).
- Nationally, there’s a linked debate about “prop bets” and college sports: the NCAA has been pressuring states to eliminate player prop bets because of harassment, game‑fixing risk, and gambling addiction among young adults, which gives your Utah bill a clear connection to student‑athlete safety and campus life issues ((NCAA, Prop bet statement, 2026); (Utah Public Radio/NPR, Prop bet ban call, 2024)).
If you had to pick one angle that matters most to you in this Utah debate—protecting student‑athletes, stopping predatory gambling, defending personal freedom, or something else—what would you want to write or speak about first, and do you want to click Continue with AI to explore that angle in this doc, or go to Create Document to start your own piece or upload a source to annotate?
on the uploaded document.
0 archived comments