Why hasn’t a carbon pipeline bill come to Iowa's Senate floor? Lawmakers blame opposing parties

On Tuesday, I republished the South Dakota Searchlight article, South Dakota regulators deny ethanol carbon pipeline permit again; company vows to reapply.

Meanwhile, in Iowa, the Searchlight's sibling Iowa Capital Dispatch reported on the blame game in the state legislature, related to limiting the federal tax credit profiteers' use on eminent domain for private gain in the Hawkeye State.

From Iowa Capital Dispatch.

Why hasn’t a pipeline bill come to Senate floor? Lawmakers blame opposing parties
by Robin Opsahl

Sen. Lynn Evans, R-Aurelia, urged his colleagues Tuesday in the Iowa Senate to voice their support for bringing up legislation for debate on carbon capture pipelines.

His statement prompted both Republicans and Democrats to blame the opposing party for why the Senate has not moved on the issue for several years.

Evans said on the Senate floor that lawmakers, both Republicans and Democrats, should voice their support for debating House File 639, the legislation passed by the House in March addressing several issues related to pipelines — or any bill related to the use of eminent domain in building carbon sequestration pipelines. He made his statement as part of a “point of personal privilege” after Senate debate ended Tuesday.

Evans said lawmakers have sworn an oath to the U.S. Constitution when they took office, and his colleagues have an obligation to publicly vote about the use of eminent domain in building private carbon capture pipelines, as the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution deals with the use of eminent domain in taking private property for public use.

“This is not only a constitutional issue,” Evans said. “It is simply the right thing to do for our property owners, as many of them who have an objection to the use of eminent domain are generational landowners. It means much more to them than just productivity. It’s part of their family, it’s part of their heritage, it’s part of their being.”

Eminent domain allows the government to force unwilling landowners to sell easements on their property for projects deemed to be a public benefit — often, projects like building roads or public utilities. The Iowa Utilities Commission has allowed the use of eminent domain for Summit Carbon Solutions’ proposed carbon sequestration pipeline over the objections of landowners and others who argue the private project is not in the public’s interest.

The House bill is the most likely to come up for discussion and a public vote by the Senate, as it has passed the Senate Commerce Committee. The measure was amended by the Senate committee, led by Sen. Mike Bousselot, R-Ankeny, to remove some portions of the House legislation while adding new components, like expanding the scope of the bill to cover other types of pipelines and allow pipeline projects to seek voluntary easements outside of the original project corridor.

Evans urged his colleagues to move on the bill because it is the first measure on pipelines to become eligible for floor debate in the Senate in several years.

Pipelines have been a high-profile issue at the Iowa Legislature for several years as the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline project is going through the approval process. Landowners who own property in the path of the proposed carbon sequestration pipeline, which would span more than 1,000 miles in Iowa, have been frequent visitors to the State Capitol, meeting with lawmakers and protesting the lack of action to limit the use of eminent domain in building the pipeline.

House lawmakers have passed bills in several previous sessions with bipartisan support that have failed to gain traction in the Senate. Evans called for lawmakers to speak with Senate Majority Whip Mike Klimesh to share their stance on the bill, “because we need to know how many people are in support of this.”

“We better all be in support of it, every one of us, doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican or Democrat — we took an oath to support the U.S. Constitution,” Evans said. “Let Sen. Klimesh know where you stand on this. He’s probably going to ask you the question, as he should, ‘What bill do you want to see move forward,’ and ‘How do you want to see it move?’ Look him in the eye and say, ‘I don’t care. Let’s get something to the floor, and let’s vote on it,’ and let’s protect the rights of our property owners in this state.”

Sen. Zach Wahls, a Coralville Democrat, said Republicans, including Evans, voted against a Senate rule change to allow “discharge petitions” — an alternate way to bring certain bills to a vote in the Senate. Discharge petitions are used when the chair of a committee chooses not to place a certain bill on the committee’s agenda, removing it from consideration and not allowing a vote to take place.

Wahls indicated allowing this process to happen could have brought pipeline bills to a vote in the Senate. Still, Wahls added that he hoped Evans was being “earnest” when calling for lawmakers to talk to leadership about the amended legislation currently available for debate in the chamber.

“I hope that maybe this signals a willingness on the part of the majority to work with Democrats when it comes to passing legislation that’s good for Iowa,” Wahls said.

Sen. Jesse Green, R-Boone, also jumped into the discussion, asking Wahls if the Iowa Democratic Party has “made an official statement on their stance on the pipeline.” While Democrats have not made a statement as a party about their position on the pipeline, Wahls said Green was portraying the issue of eminent domain as partisan.

“You want to say, ‘Well, Democrats believe this, or all Democrats believe that,’ the same way that you want to say, ‘All Republicans believe this, or all Republicans believe that,’ and try to make this a partisan thing — when we all know that if that bill was on the floor, there’d be 26 votes for it,” Wahls said.

Green said Democrats “enjoy theatrics, the cameras, all that stuff” in bringing up amendments to legislation that he said were not discussed with Republican leaders, and he believed members of the minority party should be having “those serious conversations with a few handful of Republicans before you do that.”

He said Republicans were having private conversations about the legislation.

“We as Republicans, are having a serious conversation within our caucus, and I appreciate all Republicans that have engaged in that conversation,” Green said. “I’m sorry we’re not theatrical about it. I’m sorry we don’t make public spectacles about it. But in this chamber, I commend everybody that has been a part of this conversation. And I do hope that as the session wraps up, that we will come to an agreement.”

Sen. Tony Bisignano, D-Des Moines, said Democrats have “been sitting here for years” asking for the majority party to bring the issue to a vote in the Senate. Bisignano said the Senate majority leader and Senate president have the ability to bring the bill to the floor at any time, and called for the Republican leaders to bring the bill up for debate Tuesday.

“Let’s frame this the way it is: it’s a property rights bill of taking people’s property for the private sector,” Bisignano said. “… I’d be more than happy to take that vote this afternoon. Madam President, Mr. Majority Leader, bring the bill up, and let’s debate it, and let’s vote.”

Photo: The Iowa Senate convened just after 10 a.m. on Jan. 13, 2025. (Photo by Kathie Obradovich/Iowa Capital Dispatch).

This Iowa Capital Dispatch article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Posted by: |

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:

Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Bluestem Prairie

News from Greater Minnesota and South Dakota

Apr 23, 2025