Anti-pipeline activists cheer expected removal of federal permit preemption from reconciliation bill
A provision to let pipeline companies bypass state permitters is expected to be stripped from the 'big, beautiful' federal budget reconciliation bill, but anti-pipeline activists want Congress to kill a carbon tax credit program before they pass the bill along to President Donald Trump.
That was the message from a group of South Dakota carbon dioxide pipeline opponents during a virtual press conference Monday. Representatives from Dakota Rural Action, the South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance, and the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association joined the call.
Last week, groups in the anti-carbon pipeline camp raised alarms about the reconciliation bill over a provision tucked within its 1,100 pages. It would have given the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission exclusive authority to issue licenses for pipelines carrying natural gas, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, oil or other energy products and byproducts.
Is Congress trampling on state laws protecting property rights against pipelines?
The state permitting process has been a political minefield for a proposed carbon pipeline from Summit Carbon Solutions that would traverse parts of Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota and South Dakota, collecting carbon from ethanol plants on its way to a North Dakota sequestration site. The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission has rejected the project twice.
South Dakota Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden signed a bill into law in March banning the use of eminent domain by carbon pipeline companies, stripping Summit of the potential use of state court condemnation actions to build beneath land owned by project opponents.
Critics said the federal permitting provision in the reconciliation bill would've allowed Summit to preempt state-level regulations.
The bill passed through a House committee Sunday night. President Trump has called it a 'big, beautiful bill' chock full of tax breaks and cuts to wasteful spending; opponents have decried it as a plan to carve large swaths of the citizenry out of entitlement programs such as Medicaid. The complex budget reconciliation process allows the majority party to pass legislation with simple majorities in both chambers, avoiding the U.S. Senate's usual 60-vote requirement.
The federal pipeline preemption provision will be removed in the House Rules Committee on Wednesday morning, according to Kristen Blakely, who works for U.S. Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-South Dakota.
Opponents of the Summit project celebrated that news on the Monday press call.
'It was good to see that they removed the federal siting authority,' said Republican state Sen. Joy Hohn of Hartford.
Pipeline opponents remain concerned about one other provision that remains in the bill. It would let pipeline companies pay the federal government $10 million for an 'expedited environmental review' lasting one year, with a possible extension of up to six months. The current federal review process can take years. Under the provision, an expedited review's results would not be appealable.
Summit doesn't need that level of environmental review, though other pipelines – like the controversial Dakota Access crude oil pipeline that Hohn fought to prevent nearly a decade ago – do need them.
Blakely told Searchlight that the expedited environmental review no longer applies to any carbon pipelines, as it was tied to the now-scuttled preemption provision for permits.
Hohn was elected on a landowner rights platform and helped shepherd the eminent domain ban through the statehouse.
Summit's business model hinges on the company's intended collection of billions in 45Q tax credits for companies that sequester carbon, keeping it from contributing to climate change.
Hohn and the others on hand for Monday's press conference want to see Rep. Johnson push for the elimination of that program, which has existed for decades and was beefed up through former President Joe Biden's Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
Race for South Dakota governor could be a race for Trump's favor
'We are calling for Rep. Johnson to die on this hill,' said Chase Jensen of Dakota Rural Action, who called the notion of 45Q credits surviving in a U.S. Capitol transfixed by talk of wasteful spending 'insane.'
Ed Fischbach, a board member of Dakota Rural Action, called the 45Q program 'nothing but corporate welfare.'
Dennis Fieckert of the South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance suggested that Johnson's potential entry into the 2026 South Dakota gubernatorial contest would start off on the wrong foot without a push to end 45Q.
Hohn was one of several state lawmakers who earned their office last year through opposition to eminent domain for carbon pipelines. In that same election, South Dakota voters shot down a law passed by state lawmakers in 2024 that would have granted landowners additional rights but also cleared a path for permitting by Summit.
Rep. Johnson 'knows what's going on here in South Dakota,' Feickert said, adding, 'He needs to step up.'
Blakely, Johnson's spokeswoman, pointed out that the reconciliation bill would alter the tax credit program by limiting access to companies that begin construction within two years of the bill's enactment. The bill also restricts access to credits by taxpaying companies that are 'specified foreign entities' like Chinese defense companies, or taxpaying companies influenced by those entities.
As far as the notion of eliminating 45Q, a statement from Johnson said he's still working with his colleagues to make the 'big, beautiful bill' a 'more conservative' piece of legislation.
'I've been on the frontlines to help eliminate ridiculous portions of the Inflation Reduction Act, like EV chargers and other Green New Deal policies,' Johnson said.
Jensen, of Dakota Rural Action, said the credits in 45Q didn't originate with the Green New Deal, the name attached to a set of policies promoted by some of Congress' more liberal members. The tax credits originated under a bill signed by President George W. Bush in 2008, and were expanded by President Trump during his first term in office before President Biden's infrastructure bill expanded them further.
'Our congressman continues to make it sound like this is about getting rid of the Green New Deal, and that this is Biden's fault, but in reality, this is a bipartisan agenda that we are trying to get rid of,' Jensen said.
South Dakota Searchlight is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. South Dakota Searchlight maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Seth Tupper for questions: info@southdakotasearchlight.com.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Pushes to Extend Federal Control of Washington Police, Eyes Broader Powers
U.S. President Donald Trump says he'll ask Congress to extend federal control over Washington D.C.'s police force beyond the 30 days allowed under current law — and he believes the move could serve as a model for other cities.
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Editorial: Saving lives no more — RFK risks us all in targeting mRNA vaccine research
Showing that his loyalty to his own anti-vax mentality is greater than his loyalty to President Donald Trump, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the dangerous quack atop the Department of Health and Human Services, has announced that he will be rescinding a half billion dollars in grants and contracts for the development of mRNA technology and vaccines. It was mRNA that was key to both the Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna COVID vaccines that were created under Trump in his first term, but RFK does not like life-saving vaccines and so he's pulling the plug. Part of the problem with policymaking at the level of the federal government is that the impacts are often too large, too long-winded, too abstract to really be able to nearly encompass their full breadth, particularly for busy people who have their own immediate concerns to worry about. In this case, though, we can point to very clear, very grim and almost unavoidable repercussions directly caused by this decision: many people worldwide — including in the United States — will die deaths that could have been prevented. Setting aside all of the jargon, at its most basic level a vaccine is about allowing the body to ward off or survive pathogens that would otherwise be extremely dangerous and debilitating or kill a person outright. The model itself is far from new; inoculations in some form of another, including the basic utilization of a dead virus to create antibodies that can attack a live one, date back centuries. What's mainly changed since then is that we have only advanced our understanding and technology to keep infectious diseases from running rampant in our society. One such technological leap was the mRNA process, an innovation so significant that its pioneers won the Nobel prize. The effectiveness and the safety of this process has been well-documented in research settings, but we don't even have to parse the studies to know this because we all collectively lived it. As Trump's Operation Warp Speed produced, the first and most widespread COVID inoculations were mRNA-based vaccines, which enabled us to blunt the rampaging pandemic and much more quickly return our society to a semblance of normalcy. Those COVID vaccines have already been synthesized, but the real issue here are the ones that haven't, or even the inoculations for viruses that we have not even identified or think to be a threat today. Whether we like it or not, our relationship to infectious diseases is something akin to an arms race, in which we are constantly trying to counteract pathogens that, by dint of evolution, are constantly finding ways to elude our defenses and sicken us. We've stayed largely on top of this arms race over the last six decades or so in particular because of constant efforts that have developed sophisticated tools to fight back, including mRNA. A disarmament here for no other reason than ideologically-driven conspiracy that drives Bobby Kennedy is going to mean that we give the diseases an opening, which they will no doubt exploit to sicken and kill us. There are quite simply no two ways about it, and any pause in the research could have dire consequences, even if it is reversed later. Ongoing and sometimes multimonth or even multiyear projects will lose funding and might have to be shut down, with all their efforts wasted. There's no way to really put the genie back in the bottle so we have to stop it in the first place, which means RFK must be fired immediately or impeached and removed by Congress. Many lives hang in the balance. _____


USA Today
26 minutes ago
- USA Today
It's not just DC: Republicans seem happy to let Trump do whatever he wants
For a party that claims to care about federal overreach, GOP leaders certainly have been quiet about President Trump's invasion of an American city. I'm starting to wonder when our government's checks and balances will kick in – or if they will at all. On Monday, Aug. 11, President Donald Trump announced he would be deploying the National Guard in Washington, DC, and taking over the city's police force "to rescue our nation's capital from crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor and worse.' The troops began showing up on Tuesday evening. According to Trump, violent crime is up in the nation's capital, and he's the only one who can rescue the city from societal collapse. It's a convenient narrative, one that feeds into MAGA's perception of him. For the rest of us, it's a terrifying move that shows he is willing to test the limits of presidential oversight. But while Trump's hostile takeover of DC public safety is concerning on its own, it's more alarming that Republicans in Congress are letting him do this with seemingly no regard for what is ethical. Even if this deployment is legal, there are certain lines that presidents should not cross. This is one of them. And I have to ask. Would Republicans be sitting on their hands if a Democratic president were doing everything that Trump is doing? I would hope not, but here we are. Of course, Trump is lying about crime in DC Trump seems to have called in the military after an assault on a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) staffer on Aug. 3. While it's horrible that a government employee was attacked, Trump's declaration that Washington is crime-infested and dangerous doesn't align with reality. According to the Metropolitan Police Department, violent crime is down 26% compared with last year. In fact, 2024 marked a 30-year low for violent crime in Washington, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. Per a New York Times analysis, the homicide rate in 2023 was 40.4 per 100,000 people, the highest rate in 20 years. But that rate declined in 2024, down to 26.6 per 100,000 people. And homicides in the city continue to decline in 2025. While Trump is correct in saying this rate is higher than those of Mexico City and Bogotá, Colombia, it doesn't paint the full picture. A federal takeover is an extreme reaction. It doesn't matter, of course, that violent crime in the city is down overall this year. That wouldn't fit in with the Trumpian narrative, the one where he's the hero saving tourists and locals alike from violent crime. Are you worried about crime? Do you feel safe where you live? Tell us. | Opinion Forum Who even asked for this? It wasn't DC Mayor Muriel Bowser. All of this is happening to the dismay of Washington, DC, Mayor Muriel Bowser, who noted on the Aug. 12 edition of 'The Breakfast Club' that the militarization of the city will instill fear in its residents. '(Trump) wants to send the message to cities that if he can get away with this in Los Angeles, if he can get away with this in DC, he can get away with it in New York, or Baltimore or Chicago, or any other place where millions of people live, work and are doing everything the right way,' Bowser said on the radio show. Bowser is right, this is an escalation. It's Trump's way of showing everyone in Democratic parts of the country that he has the final say and that he isn't afraid to use the military to his advantage. Trump is a bully. He's using the National Guard to conquer DC as a test run. | Opinion Will Republicans hold Trump accountable for anything? For a party that claims to care about federal overreach, GOP leaders certainly have been quiet about Trump's invasion of an American city. In fact, it seems that many are supportive of the move. If a Democratic president were to try to do this, the Republican Party would decry authoritarianism's arrival in the United States. But because it's Trump, there has been zero pushback. Just like his tariff plan that's costing everyday Americans, the failed Elon Musk overhaul of the federal government, the deployment of soldiers against citizens in Los Angeles and his ruthless immigration agenda that includes trying to erase due process, the GOP is letting him get away with all of it. Republicans may even be happy about it. Imagine if Joe Biden did any of that? The Republican pearl-clutching would be generational. But this is fine because it's their king. Trump is considering extending the troop deployment beyond 30 days, something he will need congressional approval for. This seems entirely plausible, even likely, because of the Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress. I'm hesitant to throw the F-word – fascism – around, but if the Trump administration continues down this path, I worry that the rights we have as Americans will slip away. Who's stopping the president from deploying troops to other cities in the United States? It certainly isn't going to be Congress. There's some hope for the Supreme Court, but it has a 6-3 conservative majority. All of this is happening within the first year of Trump's return to the White House. There's no telling what the next three years will bring if this is how he's starting out. There should be firm lines that presidents do not cross – there are some things that are not appropriate or reasonable for a president to do. Yet that line keeps getting moved by Republicans, who don't seem to care as long as their conservative agenda is being implemented. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter: @sara__pequeno