Steffanie Smith and Dr. Gordon B. Lindsay, Health Sciences
The aim of this project was to analyze the financial contributions made by tobacco and alcohol companies to the campaign funds of Utah State legislators over time. The purpose of the research was to document the political influence these companies have over the regulation of their products. Contributing companies analyzed in this research project include, The Tobacco Institute, Philip Morris, Philip Morris Management Corporation, Anheuser Busch, Utah Beer Wholesalers Association, and The Distilled Spirits Council.
Unexpectedly, Utah State election laws have only recently required candidates, lobbyists, and corporations to report itemized contributions to the Elections Division of the Governors office. This altered the extent of this research project. Due to the limited number and accessibility of the reports, the following analysis was performed based on records from 1996. This data was made available through the office of the Lieutenant Governor at the State Capitol building in Salt Lake. After reviewing these reports, an analysis comparing contributions to legislators by party affiliation, distinction in the House or Senate, and leadership positions was done.
The results of the analysis reveal that 60 percent of Utah State Legislators received contributions from tobacco or alcohol companies in 1996, with average campaign contributions of $481.45. Larger contributions were given to senators than representatives, democrats than republicans, and legislators currently serving in leadership positions. Legislators in the Senate received more than twice the amount received by representatives in the House, democrats received on the average sixty-four dollars more than republicans, and legislators in leadership positions received 1.5 times more money than their constituents.
The analysis conducted on data strictly from 1996 was insightful. Overall acceptance of tobacco and alcohol money was expected to be lower than the reported sixty percent among Utah Sate legislators. The analysis also revealed a finding that contradicts the national trend in federal campaign contributions based on party affiliation and distinction in the House or Senate. Unlike the majority in other states, in Utah more money is given to Democrats and members of the Senate than Republicans and members of the House.
In order to determine an explanation for the current trends in Utah campaign contributions from tobacco and alcohol companies, further research is being conducted. A more comprehensive review of similar reports and the limited data available before campaign disclosure laws were enforced is being performed and scheduled for completion in December. Continuous research in this area will provide citizens of Utah and other states information necessary to make informed decisions and encourage the regulation of tobacco and alcohol by state and federal legislators.