St. Paul, MN - Minnesota exports of goods declined to $6.3 billion in the first quarter 2025, slipping 6% compared to the first quarter of 2024, according to data released by the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED). While overall U.S. exports grew a modest 3% during this period, Minnesota was among 20 states nationwide – and eight of the 12 Midwest states – that saw declines or near zero growth in exports.
"On-again, off-again tariffs issued unilaterally by the Trump Administration continue to cause significant uncertainty and concern for Minnesota companies in planning their business strategies, including importing and exporting. This quarter, Minnesota saw exports fall to Canada and Mexico, illustrating the risks posed to our state if the federal government wages a trade fight with our two biggest trading partners," said DEED Commissioner Matt Varilek. "We are closely tracking these developments and working with our business community to attempt to manage the impact of tariffs and potential countermeasures from our trading partners."
Category performance
Global sales for eight of Minnesota's top 10 exported products fell in the first quarter, led by vehicles (down 25%), cereals (down 63%, including corn and wheat) and optic, medical goods (down 5%). However, strong performances by mineral fuels, oils (up 4%) and plastics (up 4%), as well as dairy, eggs, honey (up 85%, driven by eggs) and oil seeds, misc. grain (up 36%, driven by soybeans), helped support the state's exports.
Geographic performance
North American exports dropped ($2.8 billion, down 7%), as sales slumped to Minnesota's top two export markets, Canada (down 3%) and Mexico (down 16%). Increased demand for Minnesota goods in the Middle East (up 12%) and in European markets outside the EU (up 17%) partially offset overall sharp declines in demand from Asia, the EU markets overall (down 5%) and Australia (down 31%).
"Amid the ongoing changes in federal economic policies and foreign countermeasures, we want to assure Minnesota companies and our global trade partners that Minnesota is open for business," said Minnesota Trade Office (MTO) Executive Director Gabrielle Gerbaud. "MTO continues to focus on pursuing international growth opportunities and helping Minnesota companies expand their reach and make new connections in foreign markets."
President Donald Trump’s on-again, off-again tariffs mean international buyers are purchasing fewer Minnesota products.
First quarter exports are down 6% compared to the first quarter of 2024 — and the quarter ended before Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff announcement, which raised the effective tax on imports to 27%, before courts intervened and Trump reversed or paused some of the taxes.
Minnesota exports have been hit harder than the country as a whole; nationally, exports were up 3% compared to this time last year.
Trump’s tariffs have prompted retaliation from two of Minnesota’s biggest trade partners: Canada and China, which imposed taxes on goods purchased from the U.S.
Mexico, Minnesota’s second-biggest trade partner, has largely avoided major tariffs and has not retaliated with new import taxes of its own.
Exports from Minnesota to Mexico, however, have dropped 16%, as the country buys fewer Minnesota-produced vehicles, machines, food byproducts, cereals and iron. Exports to Canada, the state’s biggest buyer, are down 3%.
“On-again, off-again tariffs issued unilaterally by the Trump Administration continue to cause significant uncertainty and concern for Minnesota companies in planning their business strategies, including importing and exporting,” DEED Commissioner Matt Varilek said in a press release.
The effects of tariffs and economic uncertainty are distributed unevenly across states and industries; in nearby Wisconsin, exports have increased 2% compared to the first quarter of 2024. North Dakota’s exports are up 5%, while South Dakota’s are down 11%.
In Minnesota, sellers of vehicles, food byproducts and air and spacecraft have suffered the biggest losses in international markets; for those industries, international sales have dropped by around one-quarter.
Photo: Couldn't use the Getty Image that accompanied the Reformer article, so here's 2025 SD export former SD Governor Kristi Noem. Having appointed her DHS Secretary, the Trump Administration has exported cosplaying ICE Barbie to all sorts of stages, fortunately out of the State of South Dakota. However, didn't count as an export. Source: Governor Kristi Noem rides, with American flag in hand, into the Cinch Playoffs Governor’s Cup rodeo in Sioux Falls in September 2023. (Courtesy of Governor’s Office). South Dakota Searchlight.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Nationwide protests against the Trump administration are planned this Saturday, including in at least eight South Dakota cities.
“No Kings” is the theme of the protests, which will coincide with President Donald Trump’s 79th birthday, Flag Day and the U.S. Army’s 250th anniversary military parade in Washington, D.C. The D.C. events will cost an estimated $25 million to $45 million, according to Army spokesperson Heather Hagan, though the price tag for the parade alone was not specified.
Protest organizers are calling attention to what they describe as the Trump administration’s authoritarian overreach.
“They’ve defied our courts, deported Americans, disappeared people off the streets, attacked our civil rights, and slashed our services,” the No Kings website reads. “The corruption has gone too far. No thrones. No crowns. No kings.”
The No Kings website lists the following protests planned in South Dakota:
Spearfish: 11 a.m. Mountain time at North Main Street and West Jackson Street.
Rapid City: noon Mountain at 300 Sixth Street.
Pierre: 12:30 p.m. Central at 500 E. Capitol Ave.
Watertown: 11 a.m. Central at 211 E. Kemp Ave.
Brookings: 1 p.m. at Sixth Street and 17th Avenue.
Sioux Falls: 11 a.m. Central at 300 N. Minnesota Ave.
Yankton: 10:30 a.m. Central at 2000 Douglas Ave.
Chamberlain: 10 a.m. Central at 100 King Street and Main Street.
“No Kings” is part of the 50501 Movement, founded to protest the Trump administration. Partners include the American Civil Liberties Union, 350 Action, Climate Defenders, Greenpeace, Human Rights Campaign, Vote Save America and many other advocacy groups.
Photo: Nicole Preble holds a sign during a protest against the Trump administration on April 23, 2025, in Rapid City. (Seth Tupper/South Dakota Searchlight)
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Lawmakers say her decision will impact their support of her agenda
The issue of eminent domain as it pertains to a carbon sequestration pipeline project in Iowa has put Republicans at odds with one another, but Gov. Kim Reynolds’ Wednesday decision to veto a bill on the issue has amplified the tensions.
On a call with landowners opposed to the pipeline project and upset by the veto, Rep. Steven Holt, a Republican from Denison and one of the lawmakers leading eminent domain and pipeline-related legislation, said there will be “consequences for the governor’s agenda” moving forward.
“The governor’s lack of leadership is why we are where we are today, and it will affect her agenda going forward until the end of her term,” Holt said.
Landowners on the call were similarly upset by Reynolds’ decision, following years of silence on the issue. Peg Rasmussen, who owns land in Montgomery County, said “a true leader steps in when a problem arises” but “Reynolds did nothing.”
“The legacy you leave behind is one of bowing down to big business at the expense of Iowans,” Rasmussen said.
Landowners also directed their animosity toward Republican lawmakers who opposed the bill, namely at senators who failed to take up the issue for four years, then argued House File 639 was a bad bill.
“The fight for private property rights will continue,” Rasmussen, who was part of a group of landowners regularly lobbying at the State Capitol, said. “Iowa legislators and Gov. Reynolds, we’ll see you at the Capitol in 2026, and we can’t wait to tell our legislators how we feel about their votes in the 2026 election.”
Holt said the “leadership void” from the governor and “civil war” among Senate Republicans has exposed the difference between “country club Republicans” and “grassroots Republicans.”
Rep. Charley Thomson, a Republican from Charles City who wrote the now-vetoed HF 639, and who, with Holt, has led much of the legislation on the issue, said the opposing Republicans are part of the “anything-for-a-buck ‘wing’ of the party” and don’t represent the “vast majority” of Iowa Republicans.
“In the governor’s view, constitutional rights, such as eminent domain protections, should not be allowed to interfere with schemes to make money, especially if those schemes are being promoted by her friends, supporters, and contributors,” Thomson wrote in a statement.
Bruce Rastetter, founder of Summit Agricultural Group, which started Summit Carbon Solutions, has been a top campaign contributor to Reynolds’ campaigns, sparking some of the criticism leveled at the governor.
In her explanation of the veto decision, Reynolds wrote the bill had “vague legal standards” and would impact projects beyond just the use of eminent domain. Reynolds cited the permit limits clause in the bill and increased requirements for insurance as setting a precedent that “threatens” the state’s business reputation.
Senate President Amy Sinclair expressed the same beliefs on the bill. In a recent appearance on Iowa Press, Sinclair said HF 639 “was not a property owners rights bill” but rather a bill “that’s just going to facilitate activists.”
“To say I was a person who opposed property rights, that’s 100% false,” Sinclair said on the show.
Sinclair and other Republicans who were opposed to HF 639 voted for a re-write amendment to the bill, sponsored by Sen. Mike Bousselot, R-Ankeny, that would have allowed companies to avoid eminent domain and instead pursue voluntary easements outside of the project corridor. It also would have held operators responsible for damage to the land for the project’s lifetime.
Thomson said Reynolds’ stated concerns were a “polite window-dressing” for the governor’s “real message” that she will “veto any bill that Summit Carbon Solutions dislikes.”
In reaction to the veto, Rep. Bobby Kaufmann, R-Wilton, vowed during a Radio Iowa interview to “work to kill every single piece of legislation that has (Reynolds’) name on it.”
The governor’s office did not respond to a request for comment on the attacks from lawmakers.
Summit Carbon Solutions, in a statement following the veto, said it looks forward to “continued discussions with state leaders” as the project advances.
Thomson and Holt said they are supportive of House Speaker Pat Grassley’s call to petition for a special session in order to override the veto of the bill.
The motion for a special session, and to override the veto, would require support from both chambers, which Senate majority leadership indicated Wednesday would be unlikely.
Corey Cerwinske, a Bremer County supervisor attending the virtual press conference, said lawmakers should introduce articles of impeachment on the governor for her “malfeasance.”
Holt said while the veto “may violate” the constitutional rights of Iowans, the governor’s action “probably doesn’t rise to the level of impeachment.”
IUC announces plans for ‘increased commissioner engagement’
In her veto explanation, Reynolds asked the Iowa Utilities Commission to implement a section of the bill that required attendance at informational meetings and during live testimony.
This was a problem brought up by landowners and lawmakers during the proceedings for the Summit Carbon Solutions permit. They alleged IUC would send representatives to meetings rather than commissioners, and that all three commissioners were not present during live testimony.
The IUC in a Thursday press release said it “fully supports” the “transparency goals” the governor requested and “will begin implementing” the practices. The release said the commission will also reinstate its public, monthly commission meetings beginning in August.
“The IUC remains dedicated to fair, transparent, and accountable governance of Iowa’s energy and utility infrastructure,” the statement read.
Background:
Tensions around eminent domain and carbon sequestration pipelines have risen in response to proposed projects in Iowa.
Three projects, Navigator CO2, Wolf Carbon Solutions and Summit Carbon Solutions have sought to build carbon sequestration pipelines through Iowa.
The first two projects were withdrawn, but the Summit project received a permit from the Iowa Utilities Commission in June 2024 and has more than 1,300 voluntary easements signed for the project.
Landowners opposed to the pipelines have lobbied for four years against the projects, and in particular their ability to use eminent domain. This year lawmakers narrowly passedHouse File 639 to change the definition of a common carrier for hazardous liquid pipelines, increase insurance requirements, set permit limits and add requirements to the IUC.
Opponents of the bill said it changed the rules in the middle of the game, had unintended consequences to critical energy infrastructure and would stop Iowa from leading the nation in biofuels production.
Photo: Rep. Charley Thomson chats with attendees at a rally against CO2 pipelines at the Iowa Capitol March 18, 2025. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch).
This Iowa Capital Dispatch article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Following that link, one lands on a page blessed with this language:
ABOUT
No King But Jesus is a national movement to unite churches, ministries, and believers across America in a time of prayer, worship, fasting, and celebration—lifting high the name of Jesus Christ and boldly declaring that He alone is King.
At this critical moment in our nation’s story, we believe it’s time for the Church to rise—not in division or protest, but in unity, faith, and love for God and country.
Below is a map featuring key locations across the United States originally listed by NoKings.org. While NoKings.org is hosting their event on June 14th, we are calling believers to gather at these same locations on June 13th, 2025 for the No King But Jesus Celebration.
This is a national call to go ahead in the Spirit—covering the land in prayer, fasting, communion, worship, and declaration. These are not just rally points—they are altars. We’re preparing the ground in unity, city by city, to proclaim that Jesus is King over America.
Join us in making June 13th a day of spiritual alignment and bold faith. The time to take your place is now.
THIS IS A LIVE MAP FROM NOKINGS.ORG SO YOU KNOW WHERE TO GATHER ON JUNE 13th
(Visit the page to see the interactive map)
A Call to the Church in Every City and State
Worship Jesus as Lord over America
Pray together for revival, unity, and healing
Take communion as one body
Celebrate the gift of freedom and the foundation of faith
Declare with boldness and joy: No King but Jesus!
Join the Movement
Whether you’re a pastor, leader, worshiper, intercessor, or part of a local church family—this is your invitation to be part of a nation-wide act of unity and worship.
Let’s cover America in praise. Let’s fill the land with the sound of faith. Let’s remind the world: our hope is not in men, but in the eternal King—Jesus Christ.
“And the government shall be upon His shoulder… and of His kingdom there shall be no end.” – Isaiah 9:6-7
Matt Shea married to Viktoriya Shea and is the Senior Pastor of On Fire Ministries. He was ordained June 5, 2021. Matt is a decorated Army combat veteran, host of Patriot Radio, retired 12 year Washington State Legislator, and constitutional attorney currently living in Spokane Valley. In Matt’s free time he enjoys going on mission trips and exploring the wilds with his church family.
In October 2018, Shea acknowledged that he had distributed a four-page manifesto which called for the killing of non-Christian males if a war were to occur and they do not agree to follow fundamentalist biblical law.[3][4] Shea was referred to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for investigation as a result.[5] In April 2019, Shea was removed as State House Republican Caucus Chair for advocating violence against religious minorities and offering state surveillance of political enemies to members of hate groups.[6]
An investigative report commissioned by the House, issued on December 1, 2019, found that Shea "participated in an act of domestic terrorism against the United States", organized and supported "three armed conflicts of political violence", and advocated replacing the government with a theocracy and "the killing of all males who do not agree."[7][8] A former ally of Shea provided documents showing that Shea and his supporters were planning to seize control of the region after the outbreak of civil war, installing Shea as governmental leader in order to institute "constitutional changes" to "sanctify to Jesus Christ".[9] Immediately after the report was issued, Shea was removed from the House Republican Caucus,[10] though he refused to resign.[11] , . . .
Two brothers who were recently arrested in Idaho along with 29 other members of white nationalist group Patriot Front have extensive ties to a Christian nationalist church known for its apocalyptic outlook and culture war teachings.
Mishael and Josiah Buster, ages 22 and 24, respectively, are affiliated with On Fire Ministries, a religious nonprofit founded a year ago in Spokane, Washington, by former state Rep. Matt Shea, who’s known for his ties to extremist groups. Much of the congregation’s teachings hinge on the Bible’s Book of Revelation, whose apocalyptic visions have inspired far-right paramilitary extremists for decades. Like other Christian nationalist congregations, the church frames culture war issues, such as trans rights, immigration, vaccines or critical race theory, as primordial battles between good and evil.
. . .Representatives from On Fire Ministries also helped promote the far-right event in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, on June 11, which was intended to clash with an annual Pride festival there.
Shea, who appeared in Idaho himself and livestreamed the arrests, also put out a video statement asserting that Matt Buster was “not part of On Fire Ministries leadership in any capacity,” but that he was a “brother in Christ and we do not judge him for the actions of his sons.” He also claimed that neither son had ever had anything to do with the congregation....
The Mayday USA group, which attempted to declare Jesus "king" of Seattle on May 24 in Cal Anderson Park, in the heart of the city's Queer neighborhood, took to the steps of City Hall on May 27 to call on Mayor Bruce Harrell to apologize for a statement he issued, redact it, or resign. Harrell had characterized the Capitol Hill event as meant "to provoke a reaction by promoting beliefs that are inherently opposed to our city's values, in the heart of Seattle's most prominent LGBTQ+ neighborhood."
Protesters were positioned around the perimeter of police barricades at City Hall. But Seattle police allowed Mayday USA members into the thick of where the protesters were. Protesters felt that these were provocations, and when they verbally objected, police intervened, leading to violent clashes targeting Trans people, Queers, and allies, and a total of eight arrests, on unknown charges. . . .
Brad discusses a recent rally/protest in Seattle over Memorial Day weekend. The event highlighted the merging of Christian nationalists, young believers, and violent militia groups. Guests Kate Burns and Matt Taylor explore the disturbing integration of multi-ethnic Christian supremacists with far-right extremist groups. They warn about the movement’s calculated attempts to provoke reactions and capitalize on media portrayal, especially as the nation heads towards the 2024 election. The discussion underscores the need for awareness and strategic countermeasures against these growing alliances.
Other that those ties and those provocative strategies, Shea and his friends seem nice.
Bluestem hopes that the No King But Jesus gatherings in the Upper Midwest are allowed to demonstrate peaceably on Friday as is their right.
However, should they linger to Saturday, I certainly hope that the No Kings folks--who scoped out the locations on the map and did the hard work of organizing--not engage should the NKBJ peeps get aggressive.
Indeed, the advice I'm seeing shared in No Kings discussions about visiting Proud Boys and others is they simply sit down and let law enforcement do its job, if they're on site.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Former Gov. Kristi Noem said in 2024 there would be “war on our hands” if former President Biden federalized South Dakota’s National Guard and stopped them from performing duties at the U.S.-Mexico border.
“If (Biden) is willing to do that, and to take away my authority as governor as commander in chief of those National Guard (troops), boy, we do have a war on our hands,” Noem said Feb. 4, 2024, on Fox News.
Noem tweeted Feb. 6, 2024, that federalizing the Guard would be a “direct attack on states’ rights.”
During an interview on CBS News in early June 2025, however, Noem backed President Trump’s call to federalize the California National Guard after Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations sparked protests in Los Angeles.
This story was produced by South Dakota News Watch, an independent, nonprofit organization. Read more stories and donate at sdnewswatch.org and sign up for an email to get stories when they're published. Contact Michael Klinski at [email protected].
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
House GOP leadership initiates request to reconvene Legislature over issue
Gov. Kim Reynolds Wednesday vetoed a controversial bill pertaining to eminent domain and carbon sequestration pipelines in Iowa.
House Republican leaders initiated an effort to reconvene the Legislature to override the veto, but Senate GOP leaders indicated that was unlikely.
House File 639 would have increased insurance requirements for hazardous liquid pipelines, limited carbon pipeline permits to one 25-year term and changed the definition of a common carrier for pipelines, making it more difficult for the projects to use eminent domain.
Reynolds, in a statement, said she shared the bill’s goal of “protecting landowners” but the bill lacked the “clear, careful lines” drawn in good policy.
“It combines valid concerns with vague legal standards and sweeping mandates that reach far beyond their intended targets,” Reynolds said in a letter announcing her decision to veto.
Reynolds followed her critique of the bill by noting that Iowa could lose its “leadership position” as a top biofuel production state if legislation stopped the infrastructure necessary to enter ultra-low carbon markets.
Central to the bill is a carbon sequestration pipeline project led by Summit Carbon Solutions that would transport liquid carbon dioxide, captured from biorefineries across Iowa, to underground storage in North Dakota.
Reynolds said the bill would stop Iowa from leading in biofuels
Farmers and the biofuels industry have been supportive of the Summit pipeline, and therefore opposed to the bill, because it would give Iowa access to the carbon capture and sequestration technologies necessary to make products like sustainable aviation fuels.
In a statement following the governor’s veto, Iowa Renewable Fuels Association Executive Director Monte Shaw said without carbon capture projects, and entry to ultra-low carbon fuel industry, Iowa could face “very real, very severe economic consequences.”
“This is a classic example of why our system of government has checks and balances,” Shaw said. “Any thoughtful review of this bill would determine that it would lead to higher energy prices for Iowans, hamper future economic development, hold back job creation, and stifle new markets for Iowa farmers. IRFA thanks Gov. Reynolds for listening to Iowans, studying the actual legislation, and ignoring the rhetoric that was as inaccurate as it was loud.”
Farmers, ethanol industry employees and union members gathered on the steps of the Rotunda May 9, 2025 to voice support for the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch)
A press release from Iowa Corn Growers Association said entrance to the aviation fuel industry alone could result in nearly 6.5 million bushels of new corn demand, which it said is necessary for farmers dealing with high input costs and decreased profit margins.
Farmers “need expanded market growth and access to continue raising corn profitably; allowing them to continue growing Iowa’s agricultural industry and economy,” the statement said.
Opponents of the bill, including several lawmakers, argued the bill was aimed solely at carbon sequestration projects, rather than protecting landowners from eminent domain as supporters claimed.
“Eminent domain” allows the government to force private landowners to allow use of their property, for a fee set by the courts, for infrastructure projects deemed in the public interest. Eminent domain has long been used projects such as public roads and utilities.
Leadership from Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy, or SIRE, said its CO2 pipeline project connecting to Nebraska’s Tallgrass Trailblazer pipeline would be impacted by the bill’s insurance and permit limit clauses, even though the SIRE project secured voluntary easements for 100% of its path in Iowa.
Reynolds cited this example in her explanation, and said the “arbitrary” term limits and insurance requirements would make it “difficult for companies like SIRE to justify the additional investment” in Iowa.
“Those who crafted the bill said they don’t want to stop CO2 pipelines that rely entirely on voluntary easements,” Reynolds said. “But that is exactly what the bill does.”
Summit Carbon Solutions thanked the governor for her “thoughtful and thorough review” of the bill. In a statement, the company said the pipeline project “opens the door to new markets and helps strengthen America’s energy dominance for the long term.”
“Summit remains committed to working with landowners through voluntary agreements—just as we have with more than 1,300 Iowa landowners to date, resulting in $175 million in payments,” a spokesperson said in the statement. “We look forward to continued discussions with state leaders as we advance this important project.”
Reynolds said more needs to be done to limit the use of eminent domain
Opponents to the pipeline project, who were supportive of HF 639, argue the pipeline would negatively impact their properties and health, and that sequestering CO2 does not constitute a “public use” deserving of eminent domain rights.
Landowners opposed to the project lobbied state lawmakers for four years before a bill was debated, and ultimately passed, in the Senate and sent to the governor.
Since the bill landed on the governor’s desk, landowners have encouraged Reynolds to support Iowa GOP values on protecting property rights.
Reynolds said the debate of when the government, or companies with government approval, can take private property is a “debate as old as the Republic.”
Reps. Charley Thomson, right, R-Charles City and Helena Hayes, R-New Sharon, spoke about legislation to regulate or limit the use of eminent domain in carbon capture pipeline projects at a Feb. 6, 2025 news conference. (Photo by Robin Opsahl/Iowa Capital Dispatch)
“I’ve consistently said that if eminent domain is used, it must be rare, fair and a last resort,” Reynolds said. “But HF 639 isn’t just about eminent domain.”
Reynolds said the bill sets a precedent that “threatens” the state’s “energy reliability, economy and reputation as a place where businesses can invest with confidence.”
Mary Powell, a Shelby County landowner opposed to the pipeline, said the veto shows that the state motto of, “Our liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain” are “just empty words” to the governor.
“Governor Reynolds chose to support the millionaires and billionaires at the expense of Iowans and their property rights,” Powell said in a statement.
Another landowner, Don Johanssen from Cherokee County, said the governor’s decision was “beyond words,” especially as the bill would have given landowners “some liability coverage” from hazardous pipelines.
The bill would have required pipeline operator to carry insurance that covered any loss or injury from accidental, negligent or intentional discharges from the pipeline, and to cover insurance increases that landowners face due to the pipeline.
“This is a sad day for Iowa that will be long remembered,” Johanssen said.
Reynolds said the bill would impact “more than just CO2 infrastructure” and would change permitting rules “across the board,” giving “uncertainty into critical energy projects.”
Opponents of the bill called the insurance requirements “untenable.”
The American Petroleum Institute’s Midwest Regional Director Mike Karbo said the bill had “unprecedented and unfeasible requirements” that would have hindered future projects in the state.
“Since there are no refineries in the state, critical energy infrastructure, such as pipelines, are crucial in ensuring Iowans have a reliable source of energy, and certainty is needed to develop the infrastructure network,” Karbo said. “We thank the Governor for doing what is right for the future of energy development in the state.”
Reynolds said HF 639 included “a few helpful provisions” and the surrounding debate “highlighted” areas for progress.
“I agree we can do more to limit the use of eminent domain, promote transparency, and ensure responsible land restoration,” Reynolds said. “We can do better.”
Reynolds, who is not running for reelection in 2026, said she is “committed” to working with legislation to “strengthen landowner protections, modernize permitting and respect private property.”
Taking one element from HF 639, Reynolds will ask the IUC to require all commissioners to be present for live testimony and ensure at least one commissioner is present at every informational meeting.
House Speaker Pat Grassley starts petition to reconvene, override veto
In a statement from Iowa House Republicans, Speaker Pat Grassley said he has requested members sign a petition to reconvene the Legislature in a special session.
“This veto is a major setback for Iowa,” Grassley said in the statement. “It is a setback not only for landowners who have been fighting across Iowa, but for the work the House of Representatives has put in for four years to get legislation like HF 639 passed. We will not stop fighting and stand firm on our commitment until landowners’ in Iowa are protected against Eminent Domain for private gain.”
Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, said he was “very disappointed” in the governor’s decision and that he was supportive of a special session to override the veto.
Two-thirds of the Legislature must sign a petition to request a special session, and to override a veto, two-thirds of the members from each chamber must vote to pass the bill again.
Sen. Jack Whitver, R-Grimes, the majority leader for the chamber, said he expects most of his caucus will “not be interested in any attempt” to override the governor’s veto.
The bill likely would not have advanced in the Senate had it not been for a dozen Republican senators who vowed to block necessary budget legislation until the chamber debated eminent domain. The 12 were also joined by Senate Democrats in pushing for amendments, which were ultimately defeated, and approval of the bill.
Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, speaks at rally against the pipeline at the Iowa Capitol Mar. 18, 2025. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch)
Senate Democrats said the fight for property rights will continue.
“I’m disappointed by the governor’s veto of HF639, but, unfortunately, I cannot say I’m surprised,” Sen. Janice Weiner, D-Iowa City, said. “There is simply no amount of political posturing or legislative stonewalling that can deny the fact that Iowans’ right to private property should never be infringed upon for private gain.”
One of the 12 to disagree with the Senate majority, Sen. Kevin Alons, R-Salix, said signing the bill was “the single option available” to protect the rights of impacted landowners. Alons pledged to “never quit working” on the issue, but said that means “very little” to landowners who have been impacted by the “unprecedented, and unconstitutional land grab.”
“To be clear: the Iowa government has given this private company the right to take people’s land for one reason: corporate earnings,” Alons said in a statement. “This has nothing to do with public use. It’s absolutely not necessary for the ethanol industry in our state … And it certainly is not what the founders had in mind.”
Alons said when the Legislature returns in January, he and other lawmakers “will use every tool at our disposal” to “return property rights back to the people.”
Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, who sponsored the legislation, wrote in a social media post he was “profoundly disappointed” by the veto. Holt said the state constitution and the Republican platform are clear in their message that eminent domain is for public use projects.
“Today the Governor has chosen to ignore landowners, the vast majority of the Legislature, the Republican Party Platform and the Iowa Constitution by choosing the economic development argument of special interests,” Holt wrote.
Holt said Reynolds, and the Senate had opportunities of the past several years to offer their own suggestions to the eminent domain issue instead of opposing House legislation.
“On behalf of the people of Iowa and their fundamental property rights, the Governor’s veto should be overridden,” he wrote. “This fight for who we are as Republicans is far from over.”
House Democratic Leader Rep. Brian Meyer said parties in the House collaborated to “protect property rights.”
“At the end of the day, there is only one group to blame for the failure of the eminent domain bill: Iowa Republican lawmakers,” Meyer said in a statement.
The first phase of the Summit Carbon Solutions project was approved by IUC nearly a year ago, which granted Summit the right to condemn easements from landowners who do not want to voluntarily sign agreements to put the pipeline on their land. Per the Iowa permit, Summit still needs a permit from South Dakota, which it has been denied twice, to begin construction.
PHOTO--top: Gov. Kim Reynolds vetoed a bill Wednesday aimed at CO2 pipelines and eminent domain. She's pictured at her 2025 Condition of the State Address Jan. 14, 2025. (Photo by Robin Opsahl/Iowa Capital Dispatch).
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds vetoed a bill restricting eminent domain on carbon capture pipelines in Iowa Wednesday.
The bill would not have been a full ban on eminent domain for those types of pipeline but limited its usage, make companies carry more insurance and place new guidelines on the Iowa Utilities Commission.
A group of landowners urged Reynolds to sign the bill saying it gave them more protections over their own land.
Iowa ethanol industry leaders and carbon capture pipelines wanted her to veto it, saying it could push biofuels investments outside of Iowa.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
WEST FARGO, N.D. — The demand for jet fuel is going up. The demand for gasoline is going down.
That’s the simple explanation from Chris Ryan, the president and chief operating officer of Gevo, on why the company plans to add a sustainable aviation fuel plant to the corn-based ethanol plant it purchased at Richardton in southwest North Dakota.
Ryan said the low-carbon jet fuel won’t come cheap – throwing out a ballpark figure of $500 million for a potential project still years down the road.
Ryan spoke Tuesday in Fargo at the Midwest Agriculture Summit hosted by The Chamber of Fargo, Moorhead and West Fargo.
Red Trail Energy near Richardton, North Dakota. (Amy Dalrymple/North Dakota Monitor)
The Red Trail plant was the first ethanol producer in the country to implement carbon sequestration — capturing carbon dioxide from the plant’s corn fermentation tanks and pumping it into permanent underground storage.
The CO2 sequestration is key in lowering the carbon intensity score of the plant and for sustainable jet fuel production. Low-carbon fuels can fetch a higher price than traditional liquid fuels.
“We could make gasoline, but it’s a diminishing market,” Ryan said. “So jet fuel is a kind of sexy thing to talk about these days.”
In an interview with the North Dakota Monitor, Ryan said there is plenty of room to add a jet fuel plant at the 500-acre Richardton site. He said the plant would add about 50 jobs, about the same number that the ethanol plant employs.
Expanding the ethanol plant also is a possibility, Ryan said.
The company also is considering adding wind turbines at Richardton to provide power and lower the carbon score even further, he said. Even though renewable energy tax credits are a possible target for budget cuts under President Donald Trump, he said wind energy at the site still makes good economic sense.
South Dakota plans discussed
Gevo also has plans for a sustainable aviation fuel plant at Lake Preston in southeast South Dakota.
The future of that plant depends in large part on the five-state Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline project that would take carbon emissions from ethanol plants to western North Dakota for underground storage.
Ryan said when the South Dakota project was conceived, it did not include carbon capture. But as construction costs soared with the COVID-19 pandemic, he said it became necessary to sign on to the Summit pipeline project. He said the federal tax credits for carbon sequestration would help offset the higher building costs.
He added that Gevo bought more land than it needed for the project. That is allowing for other projects at the site, benefiting Gevo and the Lake Preston area, he said.
The Summit delays spurred the purchase of Red Trail, which had the advantage of sitting almost on top of an area suitable for underground carbon storage.
“We had to take our destiny into our own hands,” Ryan said, and not be dependent on the Summit pipeline.
He said Gevo can “copy and paste” the engineering work done for the South Dakota site to the Richardton site.
Potential use of carbon for oil recovery acknowledged
While the carbon dioxide from the Richardton plant is being pumped underground, Ryan said Gevo recognizes that it has a potential for use in North Dakota’s oilfields, making oil wells more productive through what is called enhanced oil recovery.
Ryan said if the oil industry is willing to pay for carbon dioxide to use in enhanced oil recovery, Gevo would sell the CO2 rather than pump it underground.
“We don’t care where the revenue comes from, right? Today, we sequester it for a tax credit, and we can sell carbon credits,” Ryan said. “Or you can sell it to somebody for enhanced oil recovery.”
He said he sees it as another advantage of doing business in North Dakota.
“People in North Dakota get that, they understand the value of that,” Ryan said.
This story was originally published by the North Dakota Monitor. Like South Dakota Searchlight, it’s part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. North Dakota Monitor maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Amy Dalrymple for questions: [email protected].
Photo: Chris Ryan, right, president and chief operating officer of renewable fuels company Gevo, speaks June 10, 2025, in West Fargo, N.D., at the Midwest Ag Summit. At left is Greg Lardy, vice president for agriculture at North Dakota State University. (Jeff Beach/North Dakota Monitor).
This article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
I watched most of the time the Minnesota House was in session on Monday. It was about what one would expect.
I'll take a look at votes on some of the bills when the roll calls are published. I'll be gone for my partner's eye examine in Sioux Falls much of the day, so it may have to wait for Wednesday.
For now, a quick digest of news about the session.
About that talk of needing all 21 hours left in a legislative day to complete a special session?
House members were more than up to the challenge Monday. Beginning at 10 a.m., they had all but two bills passed by the end of the 2100 hour, if one wants to use military time.
With passage shortly thereafter of the tax and revisor’s bills, representatives who live in the Twin Cities metropolitan area were likely home before midnight.
And Minnesotans need not worry about a partial government shutdown July 1 with an approximately $66 billion state budget for the 2026-27 biennium a few Gov. Tim Walz signatures away from becoming law. . . .
An incensed Minnesotan took to the state’s House floor Monday night to rail against a bill to fund transportation.
“I just kind of want to get this off my chest here a little bit first. This bill is a result of a broken deal.”
Another speaker pointed out holes in legislation outlining spending for the environment and natural resources.
“There is no happiness in this bill. It truly was a compromise bill, and as I like to tell my children, when you compromise that means everyone is unhappy.”
These dissenting voices were not irate members of the public or even renegade legislators. Instead, they were, respectively, Rep. Kristi Pursell, DFL-Northfield, and Erin Koegel, DFL-Spring Lake Park, the co-authors – alongside two Republican House co-chairs – of the very bills they were railing against.
Like a college sophomore completing their tardy term papers in one night, the Minnesota Legislature met Monday for a one-day only special session called by Gov. Tim Walz. . . . .
. . . Here’s some key takeaways from the now completed budget, pending the signature of Gov. Tim Walz, who has 14 days after he receives them to sign or veto the bills passed during the Tuesday special session:
The budget is smaller than the record-breaking $72 billion two-year budget passed by the DFL-controlled Legislature in 2023, which was bolstered by the American Rescue Plan and other federal spending under President Joe Biden.
The budget bills take a step towards resolving the deficit projected to begin in the 2028-29 budget years, but don’t avert it entirely. It closes the gap between revenue and spending by 45%, and will leave approximately $1.9 billion on the bottom line at the end of the biennium. But current projections — which are likely to change significantly based on the economy and federal budget — predict a $290 million deficit in 2028-29.
The budget will cut approximately $283 million from projected expenditures over the next two years, with most of the savings coming from the Department of Human Services.
Republicans, who control half of the House, won a major concession from the DFL: the repeal of MinnesotaCare eligibility for undocumented adults. The vote came after impassioned speeches from Democrats opposed to the bill. Rep. Kaohly Her, a St. Paul Democrat, said she was “illegal” because her father lied on an immigration paper to expedite her family’s journey to the United States, highlighting the desperate circumstances many immigrants find themselves in. She later clarified that she and her family are American citizens.
Lawmakers opted not to give agencies a bump in funding to cover inflation, except for areas of the budget where inflation is built into funding formulas, like education and some areas of DHS. The move saves money across the budget, but will squeeze state agencies as the cost of providing services outpaces their funding.
The budget holds education funding steady for the next two years. It also funds pay raises for home care and nursing home workers.
The Legislature also passed a roughly $700 million infrastructure package to pay for upgrades to the state’s roads and bridges. The package, known as a bonding bill around the Capitol because it’s funded with borrowed money, required a three-fifths supermajority to pass.
A budget bottleneck came unclogged as the Minnesota Legislature bolted through bill after bill to finish a $66 billion two-year spending plan early Tuesday and avoid a possible government shutdown.
It took a special session to complete the job after the regular session ended in May with much undone. With a firm deal in hand, lawmakers churned through sprawling bills one after another and wrapped up their work.
The House beat the Senate to the finish line, adjourning at 10:40 p.m. after about 12 hours of work. Senators clocked out around 1:55 a.m.
“From the very beginning, this has been a hard-fought session,” Senate President Bobby Joe Champion, DFL-Minneapolis, said as he drew things to a close. “And to get here we ultimately had to forge relationships and compromises that are not always easy.” . . .
Photo: Lights stay on inside the Minnesota State Capitol Building as the sun sets during a special legislative session Monday, June 9, 2025. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer).
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
If Republicans in the U.S. Senate pass the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” as written, 13,000 South Dakotans would lose Medicaid and the state would lose $931 million in federal funding for the program by 2034, according to a new analysis.
Medicaid is a federal-state health insurance program for low-income people. The budget reconciliation bill, which passed the U.S. House, aims to reduce federal Medicaid spending through various policy changes by about $793 billion. The biggest changes include setting a work requirement for some enrollees and mandating more frequent eligibility checks. The work requirement would take effect in January 2027.
Republicans, including South Dakota’s delegates, say the policies would reduce waste, fraud and abuse in the program. Democrats say they would increase barriers, resulting in eligible people losing health insurance.
South Dakota Medicaid enrollments would decline by about 10%, or around 13,000 people, by 2034, according to an updated analysis from health policy organization KFF. The projections use Congressional Budget Office estimates to unpack the potential state-by-state impacts. Nationwide, 10.3 million fewer people would be enrolled in Medicaid by 2034, according to the CBO.
Combined with the expected expiration of the Obama-era Affordable Care Act’s enhanced premium tax credits at the end of this year, the projected number of uninsured South Dakotans rises to about 20,000.
Medicaid cuts would “force states to make tough choices,” KFF reported: “maintain current spending on Medicaid by raising taxes or reducing spending on other programs; or cut Medicaid spending by covering fewer people, offering fewer benefits, or paying providers less.”
The majority of the cuts, according to KFF, would come from three sources:
Work requirements mandating that adults who are eligible for Medicaid expansion must meet work and reporting requirements (estimated to save $344 billion as people become ineligible).
Repealing a Biden administration rule simplifying eligibility and renewal processes (estimated to save $167 billion).
Setting a moratorium on new or increased provider taxes (estimated to save $89 billion).
The cost estimates can be uncertain because states might choose to implement a work requirement with easier or harder reporting requirements than other states. South Dakota is exploring implementing its own work requirements, which are more relaxed than the federal proposal.
Maps: Top--Estimated Medicaid enrollment loss based on 2034 enrollment numbers across 50 states, according to KFF. (Courtesy of KFF). Bottom: Projected federal Medicaid cuts by state if the “Big Beautiful Bill” passes the U.S. Senate, according to KFF. (Courtesy of KFF).
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Recent Comments