Senator Thomas, under his constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 313.
Senator Thomas’ statement is as follows:
Obviously, I am in a distinct minority on the last vote and folks must be asking, “Thomas, have you lost your mind? You are voting against disabled veterans.” Taken in context, that would seem like an odd vote to take. However, I believe it to be a consistent vote—consistent with the body of law that Michigan has adopted over the past several years and consistent with the fiscal challenges that the state of Michigan confronts. And, ultimately, it’s a vote of conscience on my part.
I believe that the preference that was just given poses the potential for a fiscal challenge to the state of Michigan. Particularly, it causes the opportunity of the state now being required to pay the highest bidder for state work—not the lowest—but the highest bidder as there is now a preference set-aside for disabled veterans.
My colleagues may remember that the residents of the state overwhelming voted to oppose preferences in public contracting in 2006. Nearly 60 percent of Michigan residents voted in support of Proposal 2. Michigan residents overwhelmingly stated that they did not want preferential treatment given to anyone on the basis of race, ethnicity, skin color, sex, or national origin. Yet, today, we are going against the spirit of Proposal 2 and doing exactly what the citizens on Michigan said we should not be doing, and that is offering a preference. I think to be consistent, legislators should have opposed this not because we don’t support giving veterans a hand up, it is because we are being consistent with the wishes and the will of the voters of Michigan.
Last summer, let me give you a real-life example of the potential problem that could happen because of the legislation we just passed. Two contractors bid on a small Department of Transportation contract. The proposal chosen by DMB was awarded to a disabled veteran because there was a preference. This bill is a result of that preference being overturned. Upon further review, the winning bidder’s proposal should not have been given that preferential treatment, so MDOT issued a new RFP. The job was re-bid, at a delay and additional cost to the state of Michigan, and following that process when the state applied the same principles that they do to every other contract that there is no preference, another contractor won the bid. That just so happened to be a minority contractor from the city of Detroit that actually had the lowest bid. This is a perfect example of what Michigan residents were trying to prevent in 2006 when they passed Proposal 2, to avoid such conflicts and such discord among competing minority groups.
So I think that we have opened up a serious problem with our state Constitution, and frankly, backdoor preferences are a thing of the past, and we cannot have it both ways. So, unfortunately, I am forced to vote against this bill. I will apologize to the veterans who I will be hosting in my salute to veterans on Memorial Day. But, because I support the Constitution that you have so bravely fought for and defended; because I believe that the voters of Michigan spoke clearly, I believe that as a vote of conscience I must be consistent with them and must support the state constitution. It says that preferences are illegal in the state of Michigan, and we should not be going down that road.