One of the issues that I have heard about most often and most consistently throughout this session concerns the carbon capture pipelines and the potential use of eminent domain to complete the projects. HF 565 passed through the House and late last week was sent over to the Senate where it was not advanced before the final funnel deadline.Some of my constituents know that I played a very active part in recruiting an ethanol plant into northwest Iowa. That plant remains in operation today just outside of Hartley. This came at a time when we needed jobs to come to the O’Brien County area and the community of Hartley, as we had recently lost a beef processing plant that took a number of jobs out of the community. Not only did the ethanol plant bring with it over 70 high paying jobs, it had a positive impact on the trucking industry, grain prices and the local economy. I was then, and remain today, a supporter of the ethanol industry. Unfortunately, this industry, and our corn producers, have been backed into a corner by unelected globalists and our own federal government.The Iowa Republican Platform states, “We oppose federal or state government taking property away from the owner for the use of another private party. Eminent domain should be used only for public use.” This fundamental principal in my party’s platform aligns directly with George Washington’s perspective on the relationship between private property and liberty. This is why I am so disappointed that HF 565 did not advance in the Senate last week.The issue is fairly simple. It is not about the questionable science behind the climate change debate or whether a pipeline should be built. It’s not the sustainability of the ethanol industry and the short-term financial gains that come with tax credits involved. It’s not even about whether it makes sense to pump a potentially marketable product underground. The question is, “Should eminent domain be used to take property rights away from an individual to be given to another private party for economic development?”In the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case addressing the use of eminent domain, Kelo v. New London, a government intermediary condemned private property, took it into the government’s possession, then handed it over to a private developer. There is no provision, or precedent, that allows private property to condemn private property, even with government permission such as the Iowa Utilities Board (IUB). The answer to the question of “Should eminent domain be used to take property rights away from an individual and given to another private party for economic development?” is a resounding, “No.”I have been very upfront and consistent in my message on this topic throughout my campaign and during this legislative session. The pipelines are private, for-profit projects. They do not serve a defined public purpose, as do utilities, public parks, or highways. As such, they should not be granted the use of eminent domain. These are NOT public projects.I will continue to push for this to be brought to the floor of the Senate for debate and for a vote. Recent polls show that the majority of Iowans support legislation similar to HF 565. Iowans deserve to know where their legislators stand on this issue. Taking away the private property rights of an American citizen for another’s economic gain destroys a fundamental birthright we all share as Americans, a right George Washington said is directly attributed to our future as a free people.
