The new stadium plan got its first hearing at the Capitol Tuesday and is looking strong. Meanwhile the governor's two casino plan is taking more hits. First the stadium plan. The first House committee to see it approved it on a 17-5 vote. MPR's one-man news machine Michael Khoo has the story:

Twins officials argue that without the new, open-air facility, the franchise won't generate enough revenue to field a competitive team. Twins Sports president Jerry Bell told members of the House Governmental Operations and Veterans Affairs Committee that time was running out to close a deal.

"The new Twins ballpark is the only way for Minnesotans to enjoy this competitive, affordable, family entertainment for generations to come. The next few weeks, we believe, will determine the future of the Minnesota Twins," he said.

Bell also said that the team would not seek a retractable roof at an extra cost of over $100 million, and that the current proposed design was not even compatible with a roof.

But before a stadium can move forward -- roof or not -- the county needs legislative permission to impose the sales tax and, under current law, would need approval from voters at a referendum. The bill under consideration, however, strikes the referendum requirement. And that's drawing heat from county residents.

John Knight is a Minnetonka attorney who's emerging as a key advocate for a referendum. Knight says the county's final bill, including interest payments on stadium debt, could top $1 billion.

"If we require a voter referendum to replace a school gymnasium or to hire more cops, why would we exempt a $1.1 billion deal that benefits a private business? As voters, we're not asking for anything special. We're asking you to simply respect the law as you have written it as our representatives requiring a referendum," he said.

The committee approved the bill without a referendum.

Things are moving on the gambling front, but it's a little hard to tell if they're going backwards or forwards. The issue of the governor's plan to locate not one but two casinos at the Canterbury Park racetrack. The latest development has Sen. Dick Day, R-Owatonna, ripping the plan. MPR's Khoo has this item:

Pawlenty has proposed opening two separate, state-operated casinos at the racetrack. One would be run in partnership with the White Earth Band of Ojibwe; the other would be a joint-venture with Canterbury. Pawlenty proposed combining the two as a way to increase support.

But GOP Senate Minority Leader Dick Day says the merged plan has become unwieldy and confusing. Day has long supported a non-Indian casino at the racetrack.

"Now all of the sudden with the Native American tribes getting involved, man, this has become the most convoluted, messed-up -- and I'm actually losing support in my own caucus, and I'm losing support amongst Republicans. And I'm losing support, actually, among some of the Democrats," Day said.

Combining the plans also cost supporters the backing of two Native American bands: Red Lake and Leech Lake. Both had signed on to a single state-tribal facility without a Canterbury connection. The various plans remain alive in the House, but are on hold for lack of support. The expected revenues from the casinos are built into budget plans favored by Pawlenty and House Republicans.

This sounds like Day is telling the governor to revert to a straight racino plan. But how does Pawlenty do that after making such a big issue out of fairness as a motive for the state getting into gambling in the first place?

One other item. Blue Cross-Blue Shield is making a big push to raise the cigarette tax. They've got a study that shows smoking costs Minnesotans about $2 billion in extra health care costs. MPR's Tom Scheck (not Michael Khoo) has a story about the health insurer's effort to put a price tag on smoking:

Minnesota's 48 cent a pack tax is currently 37th highest among the states. Raising it a dollar would make it ninth highest.

Sen. Sheila Kiscaden supports the increase. The Independence Party member from Rochester says $1 a pack increase would generate $214 million in new revenue for the state.

"It's kind of odd to be gung ho about a particular tax, but I think that the evidence is there that this tax produces revenue that the state needs; but more importantly has a very positive health benefit," she said.

The main obstacle to a higher tobacco tax is Gov. Tim Pawlenty. He says he won't sign a tobacco tax increase unless lawmakers reduce taxes elsewhere by an equal amount.

"If it's simply fashioned as a tax then I'm not for that. If there's some way to at least consider health impacts and smoking in a way that correlates the cost and it's limited to that system, I'd at least be willing to have the discussion. But not if it's a tax," he said.

Just to update the scorecard, the House and Senate have big differences on taxes, health care, transportation, gambling, and education. So why does the governor continue to travel around giving speeches to Rotary clubs? Shouldn't he be at the Capitol trying to close some deals?