opinion

Pipeline-backed 'sabotage' bill will lead to abuse of eminent domain

The "critical infrastructure sabotage" legislation before the Iowa Legislature is not what it seems. It’s backed by Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), the corporation behind the Dakota Access Pipeline, and is offered in response to arson and vandalism against the pipeline in 2016 and 2017.

This legislation has nothing to do with sabotage. It’s about silencing nonviolent dissent and influencing a historic Iowa court case.

Consider these points:

First, under Iowa law, arson and vandalism are already serious crimes. This bill would do nothing to improve the safety of public infrastructure.

Second, the legislation could apply a 25-year sentence plus a fine of $100,000 to peaceful protesters who "cause a substantial interruption or impairment of service." ETP originally said oil would flow through its pipeline in 2016. Yet because of numerous delays, some caused by protesters, oil didn't flow until June of 2017.

It’s impossible to say how this legislation would be interpreted in a court of law, but ETP could argue that, given the delay, protesters caused an "interruption" of service and deserve the maximum fine and penalty.

Third, and of greatest concern, this legislation legitimizes the pipeline as "critical infrastructure.” It lumps a privately owned oil pipeline in with public lines that transport electricity, gas, broadband service, water and wastewater.

Of all the compelling arguments against the Dakota Access Pipeline, one of the strongest is that ETP is a private company merely transporting its product through Iowa. True public infrastructure is used by the people whose land it passes through.

The pipeline’s highly questionable status as critical public infrastructure is ETP's Achilles' heel. ETP knows this, and it hopes Iowans either haven't noticed or have stopped caring. If ETP can ram this legislation through quickly, it will effectively codify a private oil pipeline as a public necessity.

And that’s a big deal because of the landowner/Sierra Club lawsuit currently before the Iowa Supreme Court. If Iowa codifies that an oil pipeline is “critical infrastructure,” it could affect the outcome of that lawsuit.

And if landowners and the Sierra Club lose that case, all bets are off with how eminent domain could be used in the future.

During the thick of the pipeline fight, a farmer along the route said to me, "If ETP can call itself a public utility because some of the crude oil flowing through my soil may eventually find its way into my gas tank, what's to stop mall developers from using eminent domain and arguing that they're a public purpose because I might shop there someday?"

Great question. Conservative or liberal, Iowans ought to oppose this legislation. It's a Trojan Horse that has nothing to do with sabotage.

It's about cracking down on peaceful protest.

It's about throwing open the doors to the abuse of eminent domain wider than ever before.

It's a slippery slope — greased with oil and campaign donations — that will only lead to further erosion of Iowans' property rights and put our land, water and climate at even greater risk.

Ed Fallon is a former Democratic state lawmaker and candidate for governor. He hosts the Fallon Forum and directs Bold Iowa.