LANSING – Considering an increase to the state’s renewable portfolio standard is reasonable, but it should be done in the Legislature through a proposed statute, not in the Constitution through a ballot issue, said Attorney General Bill Schuette, former Attorney General Mike Cox and former Supreme Court Justice Conrad Mallett Jr.

The three current and former officials said the bipartisan opposition to Proposal 12-3 (Schuette and Cox are Republicans, Mallett is a Democrat) show that the proposal to constitutionally require 25 percent of electricity be generated from renewable sources by 2025 is an unwise move.

Supporters said the backing from the officials and former officials shows the power of the state’s utilities and further bolsters the need to put the issue in the Constitution.

The three officials said a public referendum does not allow for the debate, and modifications, that the legislative process would.

“They’re skipping honest, open, public debate,” Schuette said. “They’re trying to airlift it into the Constitution. We should not mess with the Michigan Constitution.”

“The Constitution is about the rules of the game, not the outcomes,” Cox said. “Here we have someone trying to put in the Constitution an outcome.”

“The Legislature ought to be given a chance to weigh in here,” Mallett said. “You can’t make energy policy up on the back of an envelope. You can’t shrink it down.”

And he said the arguments that the proposal would mean new jobs in the state are belied by opposition from the electrical workers’ unions. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 17, Utility Workers Union of America International and Utility Workers Union of America Local 223 are all members of Clean Affordable Renewable Energy, the group opposing the proposal.

“If there were jobs, the leaders of the electrical workers union thought would exist, they would be out pounding on this,” Mallett said.

Mark Fisk, spokesperson for Michigan Energy, Michigan Jobs, the group supporting the proposal, said of the union opposition: “We appreciate the point of view, we just disagree with it.”

Fisk said studies have shown requiring more renewable power would mean 94,000 new jobs in the state.

And he said other unions see the value. “We have the support of close to 15 unions, including UAW, Steel Workers, SEIU, AFSCME,” he said.

Cox said the person who sees the most value from the proposal is Tom Steyer, a New York billionaire who heads private equity funds that invest in renewable power companies and stands to benefit from requiring more of their power. He said Mr. Steyer was a key backer of the proposal.

Campaign finance records show that Steyer, at least in his own name, has not contributed to the effort so far.

Fisk said the backers of the proposal do not change its value.

“We are very proud of our donors,” he said. “They believe as we do that increasing the use of renewable energy is going to create jobs.”

Fisk said the opponents of the proposal show the power of the utilities in state government and validate the need to put the issue in the Constitution where only a popular vote can change it. The Legislature can amend or overturn initiated legislation with a three-quarters majority in the House and Senate.

“It sounds like DTE and Consumers Energy have found their three stooges,” he said. “Every time the big utility companies trot out another current or former elected official to spout off the talking points, it makes the case of why we ought to let Michigan voters decide whether they want to increase the use of renewable energy or not.”

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