Meet the Candidate: John Sjaarda

Sjaarda running for second term in District 2 House seat

Rep. John Sjaarda is running for re-election in South Dakota House District 2. He faces fellow incumbent Rep. David Kull and Jake Schoenbeck.

The eastern Sioux Falls district borders Minnesota and includes the communities of Brandon and Valley Springs in it.

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: 47
City of residence: Valley Springs
Profession: Farmer
Public service/community service experience: Volunteer Fireman; Sioux Falls Christian School Board; Deacon, Usher & Greeter at our church, District 2 Representative, School bus driver, Foster parent
Family information: Married 27 years to my wife Kaye, four adult children, son-in-law and daughter-in-law.

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

I think the best thing the government can do to facilitate economic development is to get out of the way. In my opinion it's better to lessen regulations and taxes and to level the playing field so the private sector can do what it does best.

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

If I could have dinner with anyone it would be Rush Limbaugh.  I listened to him faithfully for over 30 years while I was working in the tractor cab or driving around. I remember thinking even at age 12 that this guy was saying and articulating what I was thinking and what I thought was best. I learned a lot from him over the years and even though I never met him and he didn't know me, I thought of him as a friend. After I won my last election I wanted to be able to call him and share my excitement with him but he was gone, and I haven't been able to find anyone I enjoy listening to the way I did with him.

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?

The "Landowner Bill of Rights" is not a balance between the interests of property owners, counties and the ag industry.  There is nothing in SB 201 that property owners get that they couldn't have or shouldn't have negotiated for themselves.  All politics is local. We need to be able to let the counties be responsible for regulating these issues.  This keeps the county commissioners accountable to what their voters want. And as far as the ethanol industry, I am about as big of an ethanol supporter as there is.  I sell my corn to ethanol plants, I use E-85 in my vehicles, I buy the distillers grains for my cattle and hogs. The ethanol industry has been the best thing for South Dakota agricure in my lifetime, but we can't be chasing some intangible, imaginary things like carbon scores which we have seen in the last few weeks can change with the stroke of a pen by the president. You can't have freedom without property rights, and letting private companies take the use of other people's land against their will so they can profit from it erodes our freedom and we have to stop it.  I do think we should let the voters have a say.  I have been going around getting signatures for the petition for the referendum of SB201 and there is overwhelming support for the referendum.  I have run into very few people who actually agree with SB 201.