LANSING – The Senate turned aside an attempt to sideline a $1 billion economic investment plan by handing the decision to voters in next year’s election, but divisions in the concept were exposed as the package was prepared for a vote on Wednesday. Still, with relatively minor changes on tap, the package is expected to clear the Senate with bipartisan support.

Doubts expressed by members during preliminary debate regarded fears that the approach is nothing more than a gambler’s roll of the dice and that it is the wrong way to use tobacco settlement funds. The proposal is an alternative to Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s package that would have provided similar investments through a $2 billion bond.

The package (HB 5047, HB 5048, HB 5109, HB 5215 and HB 5216) takes about a third of the state’s settlement dollars for securitization purposes to raise the $1 billion, which would be targeted in loans and investments in life sciences, high tech, venture projects and other businesses with growth potential. Among amendments that are expected to be offered Wednesday before a final vote is one that would boost investments in agriculture.

The provision for a public referendum on the securitization proposal, turned down by a voice vote, may be offered again Wednesday by Sen. Laura Toy (R-Livonia), who said she believes selling a portion of the tobacco settlement dollars violates the constitution.

Sen. Valde Garcia (R-Howell), chair of the Government Operations Committee that worked on the package, noted the recent Delphi bankruptcy and news almost daily of companies going out of business and said the state cannot wait for a public vote in 2006. “We need action now,” he said. At the MichBio Expo, he promised the Securitization Bill would become law by the end of October.

But Toy said, “Let’s give Michigan voters the opportunity to have a say in how their money is being spent to promote economic development.” She said using the tobacco money as envisioned in the package would be a disservice to the understanding of the purpose of the settlement.

Opponents said the Legislature is elected to make decisions on such issues as the securitization proposal, especially since it is complicated to explain.

The most significant changes from the House-passed version include removal of an earmarking of $60 million that would have gone to a Grosse Pointe Shores business executive for a wireless technology and the removal of a tie-bar that would have prevented the securitization from occurring until the state has enacted bills embodying the business tax cut approved by the House.

This story was provided by Gongwer News Service. To subscribe, click on Gongwer.Com