LINCOLN, Neb. — Faced with numerous tax-cut plans that will compete with his own, Gov. Dave Heineman made the rare move of taking his case directly to state senators Wednesday.

Heineman said his package of tax cuts, which hinges on income tax reductions and would cost more than $476 million over the two-year budget cycle that begins in July, “puts Nebraska in a position to improve our national stature and grow jobs.”

Heineman told the Revenue Committee he was delighted there are so many tax-cut options to consider this year.

But some state senators said his appearance before a legislative committee — Heineman’s first as governor, and a rarity for previous governors — is a sign he may be concerned as well.

“When there’s so much emphasis on property taxes by so many Nebraskans, it says he has to make his case. Everyone in here has heard that from their constituents,” Sen. Don Preister of Omaha, a member of the Revenue Committee, said on the floor of the Legislature before Heineman spoke. “He’s having to make more of a sale.”

Another member of the committee, Sen. Chris Langemeier of Schuyler, said Heineman’s testimony is a sign that he is committed to the plan and doesn’t want it to get “blurred in” with others before the Legislature.

“There’s a lot of passion behind all the proposals, and he wants to make sure realizing true income tax reform has a seat at the table,” Heineman’s spokesman Aaron Sanderford said.

Many of the other plans focus on reducing property taxes. One competing bill that would provide a homestead exemption of $12,000 was introduced by the same lawmaker who has introduced Heineman’s tax cut plan on the governor’s behalf and is chairman of the Revenue Committee — Sen. Ray Janssen of Nickerson.

Just one senator asked Heineman a question after his testimony.

“In the view of some, income tax is our least onerous tax structure,” Sen. Ron Raikes of Lincoln said to Heineman after he spoke. “Why would we decide to spend our tax-cut money on income taxes?”

Raikes has introduced his own plan to reduce income taxes in the state.

Both income and property taxes need to be reduced, said Heineman, who went on to argue that his budget does just that. He wants to fully fund state aid for schools, which he says should help local governments keep their property taxes low.

True property tax relief, he has said, needs to come from reduced spending at the local level.

Heineman has called state-devised programs that aim to reduce property taxes a tax shift, not true reform, because the state picks up the tab for local reductions.

Heineman’s tax cut plan would lower income tax rates and condense the number of income brackets from four to three. It also would eliminate the estate tax, the so-called marriage penalty and sales tax on construction labor.

An average family of four earning $50,000 annually would receive a tax cut of $227 under the plan.

For those earning at least $90,000 a year, the income tax rate would steadily decrease over the next four years until the rate dropped below 6 percent in 2010.

The plan relies on tax revenues that have been higher than projected and a slower rate of growth in state spending made possible partially by paring contributions to big-ticket items in the state budget.

“I know this committee is well aware that our state is at a competitive disadvantage with neighboring states because of our high tax status,” Heineman told the committee.

But his plan does not address where Nebraska has the sharpest disadvantage, said John Hansen, president of Nebraska Farmers Union. A farmer friend of his near the Colorado border, he said, pays property taxes that are four times higher than in Colorado.

“That is what needs fixing,” he said.

Steady reductions in the tax rates for the top tier of earners also makes Heineman’s plan one that benefits the rich more than the middle class, said Jennifer Carter of the Nebraska Appleseed Center for Law in the Public Interest.

“These changes only favor the very wealthiest among us,” she said.

Heineman pointed out that without the changes he proposes a middle-class family with a gross income of more than $50,000 will continue to pay the same rate as Warren Buffett and other billionaires.

Business groups have lined up in support of Heineman’s plan, including state and local chambers of commerce and contractors. The state’s income tax structure has damaged the image of the state and its standing as one of just a few with state estate taxes “makes us stand out,” said John Cederberg, a CPA who spoke on behalf of some of the groups.

Members of the committee didn’t seem overly skeptical of any pieces of Heineman’s plan, but did question the need to repeal the sales tax on construction labor.