It was sent to her on the 16th. As far as I know she has not done anything with it yet.
But she is expected to veto it, correct?
According to an article in the Detroit News today she has until the end of next week to sign it or veto it. If she doesn't act by then it will automatically pass. She is expected to veto it.
In my opinion its a question of freedom vs the nanny state. There is little doubt that more people will die or be injured without the law. And Granholm will use the medical costs as a reason for vetoing the bill.
But you could use the same logic to justify government involvement in most aspects of our lives. Everything from smoking to eating a cheeseburger to owning a gun to participating in dangerous sports could be taxed, regulated or banned by government for the same reasons. I prefer freedom. People should wear helmets because its the smart thing to do not because government mandates it.
