Peterson seems likely to run for re-election
January 29, 2014 | 05:11 PM

Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn.
In interviews after the House passed the farm bill today, House Agriculture Committee ranking member Collin Peterson, D-Minn., gave the impression that he is more likely to run for re-election than not.
Peterson, 69, was asked about his political plans by Washington reporters off the House floor after the bill passed and in a telephone news conference his office arranged with rural reporters.
Noting that he has filed the paper work for re-election and is raising money, Peterson told both groups of reporters, “I’m running until I’m not.”
“I haven’t decided. I’m going to take some time. I’ve been in limbo here, in farm bill hell for three years,” Peterson said off the House floor, adding that he intends to take “a couple to three weeks” to decide whether to run, and to think about how he would organize the campaign and what he would run on.
Peterson’s western Minnesota district usually votes Republican, and political analysts and strategists have marked it as a likely pick-up for the Republicans, unless he runs again
Peterson said he would make a decision by about March 1.
One issue he noted that is coming up on the House Agriculture Committee after the farm bill is the reauthorization of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which is also in the committee’s jurisdiction.
Peterson also noted that he faced the same situation after the completion of the 2008 farm bill, and that he felt much more enthusiastic about running after getting a rest and thinking about the campaign.
Asked if he would not like to bask in a likely re-election after the success of another farm bill, Peterson noted that The Wall Street Journal editorial page today criticized House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, for working with him on the dairy provisions of the new bill and said it would help Peterson get re-elected.
“The main achievement of this bill will be to re-elect Mr. Peterson, the Democrat, and give more GOP voters reason to wonder why they elected these guys,” the WSJ editorial said.