Reaction to Senate President Amy Sinclair appearance on Iowa Press

By RAN Editor | June 6, 2025

Iowa Press with Iowa Senate President Amy Sinclair
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAbjueL6I3M

From Iowa Press Youtube channel:

“Jun 5, 2025

On this edition of Iowa Press, Iowa Senate President Amy Sinclair (R-Allerton) discusses the 2025 legislative session and Senate Republicans’ agenda moving forward. Joining moderator Kay Henderson at the Iowa Press table are Erin Murphy, Des Moines bureau chief for The Gazette and Stephen Gruber-Miller, Statehouse and politics reporter for The Des Moines Register.”

Reaction from Iowa Legislators:

Rep Charley Thomson Response:

Much as I like and respect Sen. Sinclair personally, she is way off-base with these comments on HF639. And by “way off-base,” I mean “on the wrong planet.” At best, she’s been sold a bill of goods by the pipeline crowd. She’s completely confused about the actual policy provisions in the bill — but that’s nothing compared to the wild conspiracy theory she’s now promoting. She’s literally claiming that HF 639 is designed to “facilitate activists” and that Rep. Holt and I are “puppets” or “environmental extremists” or some such. Somehow, she’s been convinced that HF639 is not about property rights and reforming IUC abuses. That’s “cray cray,” as the kids say.

Let’s talk some specifics, Senator Sinclair. What’s wrong with making it clear in statute that pipelines have to buy adequate liability insurance in case something bad happens? Or is asking a company to carry adequate insurance part of some Eco-Commie scheme that (former Marine drill sergeant) Steve Holt and I dreamed up?

What’s wrong with asking Commissioners who make $170,000 per year to at least show up for work? I thought that was a concept we Republicans favored.

Also, Sen. Sinclair, you seem to be all worked up about some phantom lawsuit — why don’t you ask the pipeline crowd why it is that they’ve not mentioned a case called “Hawkeye Commodities v. Vilsack” to you? Perhaps they haven’t mentioned it to you because they know it blows their phantom lawsuit argument out of the water?

And, Senator Sinclair, has any actual lawyer spoken to you about Iowa’s long tradition of permissive intervention in administrative proceedings? Until the CO2 pipeline crowd showed up, Iowa (especially Iowa Republicans) took justifiable pride in having an open, transparent administrative system. That’s exactly the system intended by Iowa’s own Prof. Arthur Bonfield, who literally wrote the book on Iowa administrative law*. Suffice it to say the IUC (and the pro-Summit senators) are not exactly on the side of the angels when they try to restrict public participation in administrative hearings. Do you really want to be on the side that is arguing for fewer due process protections for ordinary Iowans? Do you really want to be on the side of limiting speech?

The entire CO2 pipeline project is based on lies, so I’m not the least surprised that the CO2 pipeline crowd launched a blizzard of lies in their attacks on HF639. It doesn’t matter that HF 639 is actually a relatively tepid first-step toward fixing Iowa broken pipeline permitting system. HF 639 was the first CO2 pipeline bill to make it to the Senate floor, so the fusillade of fabrications about its provisions was completely predictable and perhaps inevitable.

What startles me a bit, however, is that people who are ordinarily quite reasonable have been swept up by a series of passionately argued absurdities dressed up as policy arguments. I hope they wake up to reality quickly.

—–

*While I hold my former instructor at Iowa, Prof. Bonfield, in high esteem, I have not discussed this matter with him and do not intend to suggest that he holds any particular position on the IUC controversy. I only bring up the point because I believe encouraging broad participation in administrative matters is a longstanding principle of the Iowa approach to administrative law. If memory serves, I took Prof. Bonfield’s course 41 years ago. He was one of the giants at Iowa Law. Take a look at Prof. Bonfield’s article, “Public Participation in Federal Rulemaking Relating to Public Property, Loans, Grants, Benefits, or Contracts,” 118 U. Pa. L. Rev. 540, 541 (1970).

https://qctimes.com/…/article_c5b606fd-2cf7-4ee9-b308…

Rep Charley Thomson Facebook Post:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/16FQDueu5W/

Rep Steven Holt:

Senator Sinclair suggests I and the majority of Republicans in the House/Senate are puppets of environmentalists for supporting HF639.

Darn it! And all this time I thought I was standing up for individual rights, the party platform and the Constitution I took an oath to defend.

I could certainly make the argument that the “environmental extremists“ are those who are supporting this Green Energy scam at taxpayer expense, which does nothing to help the environment.

I think I will reject her characterization of this bill and those who support it. I still believe the House & Senate chambers, and the power, belong to the people.

More Steve Holt:

The House sent the Senate four bills over a three year period to protect landowners, including two this year, one which specifically prohibited the use of eminent domain on agricultural land for CO2 pipelines. They could’ve also written their own legislation.

Senate leadership ignored the pleas of landowners and failed to take any of them up, except for the one they now attack, which passed after being forced to the floor by brave Senate Republicans who prioritized principle over special interests.

No amount of attacks and excuses will change the fact that the Senate failed for three years to hear the pleas of landowners, and they failed to stand up for the Constitution and the Republican Party Platform of Iowa.

I do not like public disagreements of this kind, but I will not sit by while Senate leadership publicly attacks this bill in an effort to justify their failure to protect landowners and stand up for our principles.

HF639 is not perfect but it is a huge step forward, and no amount of excuses will justify the Senate’s failure to act on other landowner protections sent to them by the House. The actions of some Senate Republicans during floor debate on HF639, when they attempted to embarass those brave Republican Senators like Kevin Alons, who dared stand up to their leadership and demand action on this bill, speaks volumes as to current motivations and objectives.

I look forward to Governor Reynolds cutting to the chase, supporting the Constitution and the fundamental property rights of Iowans, and signing HF639. To do otherwise ignores landowners, the constitutional requirement of public use and the Republican Party Platform of Iowa. https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15rKu8FxzK/