Meet the Candidate: Drew Peterson

Peterson seeking second-term in House

Rep. Drew Peterson is seeking his second term in South Dakota House District 19. He faces fellow incumbent Jessica Bahmuller and Steven Mettler in the June primary.

The district includes the communities of Freeman, Tyndall, Parkston, and Salem.

The Dakota Scout sent a series of questions to all legislative candidates running in contested races for the state House and Senate in the June 4 primary election. Candidates were asked to limit their responses to each question to 150 words or less.

Age: 38
City of residence: Rural Salem
Profession: Farmer and rancher
Public service/community service experience: Two years State Representative District 19, VP SD Soybean Association, member of the board on SD Ag Foundation and SECOG. 
Family information: Wife Lauren and son Michael (1). 

1) What's the government's role in facilitating economic development in South Dakota?

The government should help facilitate economic development when there’s a clear need, community wide benefit, and private development cannot do it on its own. For instance, in small towns like those in the district I serve, sometimes the cost-benefit analysis doesn’t pencil out for a development and a town can get stuck and unable to grow. In instances like this, the Housing Infrastructure Financing Program helps to fill that gap. Like all things, we have to make sure government does not get in the way of private enterprise and works within its means to help keep our communities moving forward. SD has balanced its budget for 135 years, and we will continue to do that as long as fiscal conservatives like me are in office. 

2) If you could have dinner with any person, dead or alive, who would it be and why?

My mother Cathy Peterson. She passed away 5 years ago from cancer. She’s someone I try to be like every day. She was an incredibly thoughtful and patient mother and grandmother, and really just a selfless, servant leader for everyone around her. I’d make sure my son Michael could be there so he could meet his grandma. 

3) Does the "Landowner Bill of Rights" -- adopted by the Legislature amid opposition to carbon pipeline companies using eminent domain -- strike the right balance between the interests of property owners, counties and the ag industry - and should voters get a say when they head to the polls in November?

While unnecessary, it would be okay to let the voters affirm the importance of the new property rights protections put forward in the Landowner Bill of Rights by voting YES on the SB 201 referendum this fall. SB 201 is new property rights protections for landowners and additional annual revenue for landowners and counties out of the pockets of future pipeline companies. Why would anyone not support that? If it doesn’t get referred, it will go into effect July 1 and start protecting landowners sooner, so that would be the reason not to sign the petition to refer it to the November ballot. As a side note, the Supreme Court recently heard arguments regarding carbon pipelines’ current status as a common carrier and the subsequent ability to use eminent domain, and that ruling is expected this fall.