PIERRE, SD (MITCHELLNOW) Week 8 in the state legislature hummed right along. The second to last week seems like a transitional type of week. Committees wrapped up their work, and the chambers begin to start playing political funny business. As the legislative session comes to a close everyone can see the status of bills on the www.sdlegislature.gov website.

Transportation heard and passed its final bill that would revise eligibility of road for rural access infrastructure funds, so counties can spend those road funds on minimum maintenance roads so they don’t become no maintenance roads.

Commerce and Energy unanimously passed a bill that will require the Department of Labor and Regulation to compare and death records with people requesting reemployment assistance benefits to make sure someone isn’t gaming the system. We also passed a bill that would require a house being sold in a home owners association to disclose the terms of the association the house is in so the buyer knows what they are getting themselves into and it’s not a surprise after they purchase their home. We also passed a bill that would create the framework for South Dakota-Ireland trade commission that can provide exciting new trade opportunities between South Dakota and Ireland in a variety of different markets, including agriculture, since they would be a major importer of our agriculture products. We also heard another bill involving carbon pipelines and eminent domain, SB 201, which eked out of committee and made it to the floor; we’ll discuss that one later.

The full House Chamber had a long list of bills. There were some policy bills, but there were also a lot of spending bills. At this time in the session we start to change from majority policy bills to majority spending bills. We passed a bill that will have the schools go back to the basics for teaching reading, dubbed the “hooked on phonics” bill. The intent is to get away from the new style of teaching that apparently hasn’t been working all that well and go back to the methods of teaching that are proven to work. We also approved an appropriation that would help fund the emergency at our southern border due to the danger we face from the southern border from gangs, drugs, cartels, illegal immigration, human trafficking, and how the cartels recklessly endanger lives. We also approved funding for the new sheep shed at the State Fair. We passed another bill that would allow for the termination of a certificate for a medical cannabis establishment if they have committed serious violations of the law. Another one that would allow law enforcement to search cannabis facilities. And one that gives more control to municipalities in regard to marijuana establishments. We voted for funding for the new men’s and women’s prisons. We decided to set aside funds we have for the prisons rather than borrowing money for them since we currently have the money, and barrowing for it would take up a large portion of our state’s bonding capacity which would limit our ability to barrow in the future. We passed a couple other bills relating to rental properties – one of them regarding the notice to vacate, which I helped pass, and another involving evictions. We also had a bill similar to one I brought regarding fentanyl overdose and death, but this one was in regard to distribution, it passed overwhelmingly; and so did a bill expanding enhanced concealed carry permits to allowing carrying at schools with the written permission of the principal. We also overwhelmingly passed to put on the ballot a work requirement for able-bodied individuals who are eligible for expanded Medicaid.

The big one on the floor was the SB 201 that eked out of committee. We had over 2 hours of discussion on this bill on the floor, many opponents spoke, very few proponents spoke. A lot of folks are hoppin’ mad about this bill. I got around 1,500 emails on this bill and only maybe 100 of them in favor. I had many concerns about this bill.
• First, is more of a legal problem in the fact that it violates the state’s single subject requirement, by doing what is a new term to me called “logrolling”. That’s where they throw a bunch of different subjects into one bill to get people to buy into it for one subject area they do like, even thought they might not like a lot of the other subjects, but they add one subject to get someone to buy into it. That’s how it’s done in Washington DC, and I don’t think we want to emulate Washington DC here in South Dakota.
• Second, is takes away the discretion of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), who are the subject matter experts. The PUC has been around since 1975 and have done their job well. In fact, the reality of the situation is these bills wouldn’t be getting introduced if the permit would have been granted. The only reason these bills are even before the legislature is because the permits were denied, and now people want to change the rules in the middle of the game and move the goal post. We should continue to trust the PUC rather than try to change the rules in the middle of the game and move the goal post.
• We also keep getting told that counties can’t preempt federal law by requiring setbacks, however, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) stated repeatedly in letter to carbon pipeline companies, in September of last year, that counties absolutely have setback authority. It’s a rare instance where the federal government is affirming the local control of counties, and this bill seeks to take it away.
• I also had an issue with the buried or coverage depth. The bill requires a 4’ burial depth. I’ve spoken to people that work with large, high pressure, gas transmission pipelines. Admittedly, natural gas, but in the same pressure range these carbon pipelines will be operating in. They tell me that pipelines operating at that high of pressure need to buried 6’ deep or below the local frost level, whichever is deeper. That prevents the frost from causing the pipe to heave which causes stress on the piping which increases the likelihood for a crack in the piping. In my line of work I deal with pipe depths and frost levels regularly. For instance, water lines need to be 6’ deep or below the local frost level, whichever is deeper. Water is not flammable, but I have seen water lines explode, because it’s not whether the contents are flammable, its contents under pressure. The good thing about if a water line breaks, it runs down the street and into the storm drain. Obviously, water is not as dangerous as natural gas or carbon dioxide, and if 6’ deep is good enough for water and natural gas it should be good enough for carbon dioxide as well.
All the other instances where eminent domain is allowed are all public use – electricity, water, oil, natural gas, roads, the interstate, dams along rivers. All of those things are available for public use; however, a carbon pipeline is not public use item because the public does not use carbon. You have natural gas or propane running to your home, along with water, electricity, you fill up your vehicles with gas or diesel, you drive on the public roads, etc, but the public is not using carbon dioxide.

If this were a public use utility then I would agree that one or two holdouts couldn’t stop the project, but this isn’t a public use project. Ultimately, this is a Green New Deal project supported by people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Joe Biden, and Bernie Sanders that think we need to stop carbon from going into the air because they think it’s ruining the planet. Them, and environmental extremists like them, are the main drivers behind this project because they want to get to something called “carbon neutral” which is why they are trying to also ban the combustion engine and go to 100% electric vehicles, which would cripple the ethanol industry here in South Dakota. That is why I don’t believe we should have our #1 industry of agriculture beholden to the whims of California climate alarmists. You have to think, if we bend to their whim, then what will be their next requirement we have to comply with? Electric tractors? Where does it end?

I do think its worth mentioning that farmers and ranchers are the ones primarily opposing the carbon pipeline. If people want to sign voluntary easements for this carbon pipeline to be on their property, then that is their right because it’s their land, but it’s also their right to also say “No.” Whether this pipeline goes through or not, I care about how it’s handled; it can’t be done by stepping on someone else’s neck. I’m all for progress, but don’t hurt your neighbor while doing it. I care about rights, not just property rights, but individual rights. The rights that veterans of this country have fought and died for. I’d never recommend anyone give up or sacrifice their God given rights as an American. You should be able to do what you’d like with your land and not be forced into anything; it’s your right as an American.

We are heading to our last week, and the nonsense, games, and funny business gets pretty wild this last week. It will be interesting to see what happens. As always, keep the emails coming. My email address is Ben.Krohmer@sdlegislature.gov.

Ben Krohmer
State House of Representatives, District 20