Photo by Kathie Obradovich/Iowa Capital Dispatch Gov. Kim Reynolds talks to reporters May 17, 2022, after signing legislation dealing with biofuels at a farm near Prairie City.

As she considers whether to sign legislation limiting the use of eminent domain for carbon pipelines, Gov. Kim Reynolds faces a decision that will forever define her legacy in the Iowa Republican Party: whether to uphold the constitutional rights and the property rights of Iowa landowners, or whether to put ethanol industry profits ahead of those rights.

The party platform unequivocally supports landowner rights. The Iowa House and Senate, both controlled by Republicans, have passed bipartisan legislation that would protect those rights. This should not be a difficult choice.

However, there are many special interest groups urging the governor to veto House File 639, claiming it would harm the ethanol industry and derail future economic development opportunities in the state. But if those claims were true, why do nearly 30% of Iowa’s ethanol plants choose not to participate in this risky CO₂ pipeline venture? Why is Summit Carbon Solutions suing multiple Iowa counties over zoning ordinances, the very tools those counties use to guide and protect local economic growth?

The self-serving arguments of the ethanol industry do not stand up to scrutiny. Privately owned carbon dioxide pipelines do not align with the constitutional definition of “public use” necessary for eminent domain, and they do not justify using the government’s “takings” power to force private landowners to participate in a speculative business enterprise. Essentially, these special interests are asking the governor to pick economic winners and losers at the expense of constitutional rights.

Importantly, HF 639 does not stop the pipeline project, nor does it prevent voluntary easements. In fact, Summit has already secured all necessary voluntary agreements in Minnesota and must now do the same in South Dakota to meet Iowa Utilities Commission conditions for construction here. Iowa landowners deserve the same rights as landowners in our neighboring states.

If this project truly serves a vital economic need and garners legitimate support, it can move forward through the free market–without coercion, and without undermining the rights of landowners.

I commend Gov. Reynolds for engaging a broad range of stakeholders in this conversation. Listening to the public and not just to special interests is essential for crafting sound public policy, but it does not change the dilemma facing the governor: constitutional rights vs. special interest profits.

By signing HF 639, Gov. Reynolds would uphold constitutional rights, curb the misuse of eminent domain for private profit, demonstrate her commitment to the Republican Party’s property rights platform, protect landowners from inadequate insurance coverage, and strengthen the public accountability of the Iowa Utilities Commission.

It would ensure she is forever remembered as a champion of the Republican Party’s commitment to constitutional rights and private property rights.

——

Steve Kenkel is a fifth-generation corn grower who markets all his corn through ethanol. He and his wife, Paula, reside on the family-century farm near Earling, Iowa.