Due to a meeting Sen Annette Sweeney, SD 27,  had with constituents in Poweshiek County, we are revisiting Senator Jeff Taylor’s senate floor speech delivered on 12 May 2025.  His speech was in regards to Sen. Bousselot amendment S3165 to HF639.  HF 639 would have given landowners protections against eminent domain. The Bousselot Amendment would have solidified that taking of land for Summit’s hazardous liquid CO2 project and given Summit a monopoly on Carbon Capture and Sequestion, CCS!  

“A Private Project, Not Public Use”

Summit Carbon Solutions and its affiliates are not a public utility. They are for-profit corporations using eminent domain to seize private farmland.

The Constitution is clear: land can only be taken for public use — not private enrichment.
We stand with Iowa’s farmers and landowners demanding accountability and lawful restraint.
#FreeSoilFoundation #ConstitutionalRights #IowaFarmers #NoEminentDomain

Please Listen to Sen Sweeney during the Oct 23, 2025 meeting at the Montezuma Public Library in Poweshiek Co. Iowa.

**Shorter Version with Transcript!

**Transcript of above shorty version:

…

Robert – “It is. It is indeed two separate issues.  (pipeline issue and an eminent domain abuse issue.)
I am with Free Soil Foundation. It’s founded by Congressman King. We’re here to protect and defend (against the) eminent domain abuse by corporate entities.
A gentleman in the room – “Steve King”?

Robert – “Yes, sir. Okay. So I came to this meeting to hear what the senator has to say because I heard her waffle, with all due respect on this issue.  Okay. My question to you is, When is they’re okay to trample the rights of landowners when it’s”

Sweeney – “Take your tone down, Robert.”

Robert – “Yeah. When it is guaranteed, thank you. When it, I get excited. when It is, in the Constitution, in the Fifth Amendment, and then the taking of land shall be done for public use with just compensation. This pipeline project is not public use. It’s not a utility. And they should not have the right to take, That’s the word (take) the Constitution says, to take what is not illegally theirs to take. And to jump on what the gentleman says, That amendment they you speak of was called the Bousselot Amendment.

The amendment was flawed on his face. House File 639 was what you should have passed.

And 27 legislators, (corrected) 27 senators voted for that, 22 Republicans did not.

Sweeney – “And I was one to 22.”

Robert continues – “27 senators from both sides of the aisle wanted it to pass, 85 House members voted for House File 639.  Our Senator Sweeney, from my county, voted against it. So my question is when is it okay to trample the rights of landowners?

Sweeney – “You have a lot of questions up to this final question.”

Robert – “I only asked one question, ma ‘am. I made a statement.

Sweeney after a long pause – “When it is needed for public entities, also when it’s needed for economic development within the state.”

Robert – “Is that your full question (I meant answer?) That alone, that answer alone, ma ‘am. Thank you for correcting my tone. That answer alone is unconstitutional on it’s face. I have constitutions for you guys outside. I forgot to bring them in because I wanted you to read it for yourself. Okay –

The Iowa Utility Commission should have never given the okay for a public (I meant Private and corrected it later) company owned by her friend Bruce Rastetter to take what is not legally theirs to take for this construction, whether it be a CO2 pipeline or whatever. It’s still a private company that is not a utility.” On it’s face it’s unconstitutional.

A lady in the audience – “So can ask this question?  Because I’ve not seen this session before, so you’d be okay if in the same line, the same pattern that they’re going to put that CO2 pipeline, and they took a natural gas line.”  (uneducated on the corridor as at this time it is only relevant for the Hazardous Liquid CO2 pipeline.)

Robert –  “Yes.  I told, I followed Summit Carbon Solutions to 15 or more of their informational meetings. And I told them that if they can say in this floor at this time that they will build this pipeline without eminent domain, (THEY WOULD NOT DO IT)  I would work for them and try to muster up those easements. There is (are) many, many throughout this state that have fought this, tooth and nail. Eighty percent of the public thinks that this should NOT be done with the power of “taking”, eminent domain, condemning your land and paying you a just compensation then they see fit. What is the price of property that’s been in the family for years? That’s priceless.”

END OF TRANSCRIPT!

Read further notes on the Bousselot Amendment!

The Bousselot Amendment has been mischaracterized as an amendment that would have provided a balanced fair plan the with landowners benefiting from its protections. That is FALSE!   It wasn’t a good amendment!  Please take time to hear Sen Taylor and note the many points he brings to the floor.   In essence, the Bousselot amendment would have given Summit a complete monopoly on Carbon Capture and Sequestration in the state of Iowa with the legal use of eminent domain.

Read for yourself,  Here is the Bousselot Amendment, S-3165: https://freesoilfoundation.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Bousselot-Amendment-S3165.pdf

Here is HF639 that would have provided the necessary protection for landowners: https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ba=HF639&ga=91

Also Please see Sen Jeff Taylor’s Newsletter and Article that go deeper into the subject matter:
Sen Jeff Taylor on the senate floor: https://rumble.com/v6tohdt-12-may-2025-sen-taylor-debate-on-hf-639-on-senate-floor.html
Newsletter: https://mailchi.mp/046c16298c4b/the-taylor-times-by-senator-jeff-taylor?e=7b764a1f29
Article: https://www.taylor4senate.org/post/hf-639-the-fight-over-property-rights-protection-and-eminent-domain-abuse?

The Twenty Two senators that voted YEA for the Bousselot Amendment, S-3165 and the same 22 senators
NAYS for HF 639, Two Separate Votes, Stand

AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF IOWA
AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.  

 

Longer Version: almost 19 minutes

 

Question about contributions: