The Radke Report

South Dakota will lead the way in defending your private property rights and fighting to fully defund the Green New Deal and put an end to the taxpayer-funded climate change hysteria that has plagued American agriculture for far too long.

By: Shad Sullivan 

Read on Lonesome Lands here:

At a time when federal overreach seems to creep further into the lives of everyday Americans, South Dakota has drawn a bold line in the sand: private property rights are not up for negotiation.

As many of you know, I have a weekly podcast called, “The Heart of Rural America,” and on that show, I’m on a mission to highlight the incredible people I have the great fortune of meeting on the road. These folks inspire me and fuel me to keep working and fighting to keep families on the land and to ensure our nation remains free and fed.

As I travel, these stewards of the land and livestock have taught me so much, and I truly believe that the best people reside in the heart of rural America — folks who are kind-hearted yet gritty; who live with integrity and handshake deals; who are generous and giving; and who truly have a passion and a purpose outside of themselves. This is confirmed to me with every stop I make in my travels to speak, and sometimes, the meetings are so powerful and so profound, it’s hard to even express how meaningful they are to me.

Let me share an example of exactly what I mean.  

The South Dakota legislative session has concluded, and on the agricultural front — we battled many wars for farming and ranching families. Without question, the single most important bill to come out of this session was HB1052, which now outlaws the use of eminent domain for carbon pipelines.  

Sponsored by Speaker Pro Tem Representative Karla Lems (R-Canton) and freshman Senator Mark Lapka (R-Leola), HB1052 was widely recognized as the PEOPLE’S BILL — the commonsense, reasonable solution that would finally put to rest the tensions building in the state. 

At long last, South Dakota citizens can opt into a project like this with good-faith negotiations taking place, and we the people can also say, “No thank you,” without the threat of a taking hanging over our heads.

By: Jon Hansen - SD District 25 - Speaker of the House of Representatives

Now that HB 1052 has passed and Summit Carbon Solutions is no longer able to use the coercive and overwhelming power of eminent domain against South Dakotans (same with any other for-profit company) I’m left wondering what Summit Carbon Solutions will do next…

Here is my open message to Summit Carbon or anyone else who wants to try to come abuse our fellow South Dakotans:

It’s time for our elected officials to answer the cries of the citizens and send a clear message to potential companies who want to come do business here: We love opportunity, and we are open for new and exciting ideas. However, if you’re going to enter into business in our state, you must secure landowner easements through good faith negotiations. And you must respect those who have other business plans for the land that they own.

A Charolais friend of Arnold’s told me at the visitation, “Amanda, if someone told Arnold it couldn’t be done, he didn’t believe them. He was a dreamer, and he was absolutely living his dream.”

I’ve often said meeting people on the dusty trail is my favorite part of traveling the country speaking at agricultural conferences. At every stop I make, I am immensely blessed to meet some of the best folks in rural America, people who are doing inspiring things to make this country stronger and agriculture great.

These folks are what inspires this column and my weekly podcast, “The Heart Of Rural America.” It’s their stories, their businesses, and their pursuit of the American dream that continues to push me to fight to keep family farms and ranches on the land, where they belong.

Let me give you an example to show you what I mean.

I was recently told I was “selfish and self-serving,” for opposing a 700-mile proposed carbon pipeline that is cutting through multiple states, strong-arming families, condemning landowners, and attempting to forcibly take easements against people’s will. 

The commenter suggested that “for the good of all,” we should be willing to give up our own private property rights for a hypothetical, unproven suggestion of greater profitability for one industry. 

I was aghast to read this. To be quite frank, it sounded like extreme socialism to me. And while I value differing opinions, freedom of speech, and the ability to have difficult conversations with others, I found this to be quite alarming that an individual would suggest that standing up for your family and your neighbors and protecting them from potential harm could somehow be “selfish and self-serving.”