Recently, I submitted a formal request for a special session of the Iowa Legislature to override Governor Reynolds’s veto of House File 639, a bill affecting eminent domain. This bill would have protected landowners’ rights by preventing their land from being seized by government action to benefit Summit Carbon Solutions, a private, for-profit company.
Eminent domain is a legal process by which the owner of private land can be forced to give up that land to the government. The 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does require that, if any “private property be taken for public use … just compensation” must be paid, but that may not be a price to which the landowner agrees. I have always felt that eminent domain should not be used except as a last resort and then only for purposes that serve basic needs of the general public as a whole. The best example is probably public roads and bridges, and even there negotiating for voluntary sale at a mutually agreed upon price is preferred.
Summit Carbon Solutions, a subsidiary of Summit Agricultural Group, wants to use eminent domain to force reluctant landowners to sell their land for a pipeline to transmit liquified carbon dioxide (CO2), a biproduct of ethanol production. The pipeline would transmit CO2, liquified under great pressure, from Iowa ethanol plants to North Dakota, where it would be piped underground. The company would then collect a significant subsidy from the federal government. Arguments by this for-profit company that the project somehow would serve ordinary citizens are unconvincing to large numbers of Iowans.
Summit’s plans have roused fierce opposition from rural landowners across the state, including some of my constituents. They have fought for four years to protect their land and their homes. Day after day, month after month throughout the legislative sessions these last years they have made their presence felt and their voices heard at the Capitol. I remember speaking at one rally in the Rotunda in support of their efforts, a rally at which I shared the microphone—and the rally’s position—with a Republican senator.
This year the Iowa House passed HF 639 by a vote of 85-10. House Republicans and House Democrats joined in a strong bipartisan effort to protect property rights.
The problem has always been with Senate Republicans. While some Senate Republicans, like the one at the rally, have supported property rights and limits on the use of eminent domain, that has not been the position of the majority of their caucus and especially of their leadership. Until this year, Senate Republican leadership has not allowed any eminent domain bills to come forward.
This spring, a dozen Senate Republicans opposed to using eminent domain for the Summit pipeline told their caucus leaders that they would not support passing any budget bills until HF 639 was allowed to come to the Senate floor for a vote. The ultimatum by just the 12 wouldn’t have worked without the tacit support of Senate Democrats, but together the bipartisan supporters of HF 639 prevailed. The bill was brought to the floor for a vote and passed the Senate 27-22. I voted for it, as did Republican Senator Guth, who represents Story City. However, the other two Republican senators who represent parts of Story County, Senators Green and Warme, both voted against the rural landowners’ interests.
Just as the landowners were about to taste a sweet and well-earned victory, Governor Reynolds cruelly stepped in to veto the bill and, for now, save Summit’s pipeline project. Summit Agricultural Group’s founder and executive chairman, Bruce Rastetter, has been a major campaign donor to Reynolds and to other Republican politicians.
To convene a special session of the Legislature requires support of 2/3 of the members of each house. A bipartisan group of House members have indicated such support. So have I, but the problem again is the Senate Republicans. Their leadership has indicated no interest.
I have long been a supporter of ethanol for potential environmental benefits, for national energy security, and for the financial benefit to Iowa corn growers. A CO2 pipeline might provide benefits to the state, but it would have to clear several hurdles first. Among those hurdles are safeguards against leaks, protective setbacks, provisions for restoration of disturbed agricultural land and drainage, and environmentally sound carbon dioxide disposal at the ultimate end of the pipeline.
But the first hurdle is land acquisition. If the pipeline would generate such large financial gains to Summit, Rastetter should offer landowners prices generous enough to secure voluntary sales. Use the voluntary market, not government force.
If you believe, as I do, that property owners’ rights should be protected from the abuse of eminent domain, then please contact Senators Greene and Warme and Senate Republican leaders and tell them to support the call for a special session.
Senator Herman C. Quirmbach represents District 25 in Ames, serving his sixth term. He served on the Ames City Council from 1995 to 2003.
This article originally appeared on Ames Tribune: Protecting private property rights | Column
