Coming as the second in a pair of recent legislative appointments from Governor Dennis Daugaard, State Senator Scott Fiegen is no stranger to government. 
According to his bio, the replacement for outgoing District 25 Senator Fiegen has been serving as the mayor of Dell Rapids. After serving as a city alderman from 1998 to 2001, Scott Fiegen served as mayor from 2001 to 2007 and returned to the office in 2009. He works as director of software engineering for Meta Payment Systems in Sioux Falls.
Also according to his bio, Fiegen and his wife, Teri, have two grown children. They have been actively involved in their community and attend St. Mary Catholic Church in Dell Rapids.
That’s all standard biography material, so let’s dig a little deeper and find out more. And please enjoy 5 questions with ……………. Republican State Senator Scott Fiegen:
1. Can you give us a brief rundown of what in your background you believe has prepared you best for serving in the state legislature?
I have served as an alderman on the Dell Rapids City Council from 1998 thru 2001. I have served as the mayor of Dell Rapids from 2001 thru 2007 and 2009 thru the present. This gives me the perspective of both the legislative and executive side of government. I have been meeting with other mayors for several years, which has allowed us to share issues facing our community. Through this experience I have learned what is needed in the communities I represent.
2. With your appointment to the office by the Governor, you were quickly thrown into elections for caucus leadership. Was the process anything like you’d would have anticipated?
I think it was much more relaxed than I thought it would be. All of the Senators were very friendly and welcoming.
3. A lot of times, people have an opinion of GOP State Senators, that they can check off a list of where they stand on certain issues, and anticipate how they’ll vote. Are there any issues where you might stand apart from a majority, or that people might be surprised to learn?
This was a tough one. I think I stand firmly on traditional GOP issues, but I like to think I have an opened mind. I would say abortion is a possible issue. I do not believe in abortion. The federal government ruled on the legality of abortion with Roe vs. Wade in 1973 and has upheld it all these years. Because of the federal government ruling I don’t think the state should pass legislation we know will be overturned and waste taxpayer dollars.
4. Are there any specific issues or areas that you anticipate focusing your energies on during the upcoming legislative session? What committees are you hoping to serve on?
I am not going into the office with any preconceived notions. I will focus on small government, no unnecessary taxes or legislation. I will also focus on municipal government issues. As far as committees, I would have an interest in serving on local government and taxation. I would also be interested in government operations & audit, judiciary and legislative procedure. I guess I will have to wait and see where they place me.
5. If it’s not referred by the voters, a change in state law this year could have you collecting petition signatures in December, and starting out your 2016 political campaign before you travel to Pierre for your first session. How are you preparing your first race as a Republican candidate for State Senate?
My plan is to speak to former Senator Tim Rave and ask him many questions. I will also speak to others I know within the legislature for advice. The rest I will figure out as I get closer to the race.
And those are our 5 questions with District 25 State Senator Scott Fiegen. What do you think?
Another pro-abortion Catholic? Sounds just like Daschle.
He said he doesn’t believe in abortion. His position sounds like a fiscal conservative not a social liberal.
Yea, that’s what Daschle said too: “I don’t personally believe in abortion, but it should be between the woman and her doctor to decide, and therefore as a policymaker I support a woman’s right to choose.” Mr. Fiegen appears to be saying the same thing — he personally opposes abortion but as a policymaker opposes pro-life legislation because he believes it will cost the state money.
I read Fiegen’s statement between Daschle and my view (continue to pressure the court to open avenues for reducing abortions and hopefully allowing its effective abolition).
Daschle was unwilling to do anything legally to reduce the incidence of abortion. I don’t think Fiegen’s words demonstrate he won’t push anything. Just that which he think will be overturned.
Fiegen’s position is not acceptable to me. Until you take the fight to the SCOTUS, you don’t know and I’m willing to invest money in finding the limits.
“Until you take the fight to the SCOTUS, you don’t know …”
Exactly. Fiegen is taking the same cowardly position Mike Rounds took to undermine public support for the 2006 abortion ban.
As a Catholic, Fiegen should understand that some acts are so evil that tolerating them becomes a poison that weakens the whole of society. Sanctity-of-life issues are foundational – not because of anyone’s religious views; but because the act of dehumanizing and killing the unborn child attacks human dignity in a uniquely grave way. I am very disappointed in his response.
Senator Fiegen would be well served to read HCR1004 passed overwhelmingly by both chambers this past session. He might reconsider his impromptu response on the abortion issue after seeing more information.
Typical political thinking. A non-binding resolution is in some manner or fashion a significant accomplishment demonstrating the Legislature’s outstanding leadership on the whole abortion issue. Seriously how does this bold political posturing differ from Sen Fiegen’s answer?
So many people shocked that Gov Daugaard would appoint moderates. He has consistently supported moderates over conservatives: http://politicalsmokeout.tumblr.com/post/23678301297/daugaard-endorses-fifth-candidate
Unfortunately, that is a common attitude in Pierre and one that always frustrated me. It happened on a number of issues: abortion, gun laws, obamacare, etc. The majority of legislators would not stand up to the Federal government no matter how obvious it was that the feds had it wrong. Total neglect for the 10th Amendment (States Rights), always claiming that what the states rights people wanted to do was illegal. Which ultimately makes matters worse because the Feds gladly do more and more to take our rights away.
Major flub.
He was honest so I will give him kudos. But next time when asked that question he shouldnt pick the most controversial position in GOP politics to be different.
Controversial? Only to the damn RINOs! Being militantly anti-abortion is a cornerstone of the SD GOP, it’s only the “former” Democrats and fake Republicans who view it as “controversial.”
Huh? Any issue which gets high emotion (like your comment) is controversy. Calm down.