Election 2026: District 9 Congressional Candidate Tim Peck

Continuing our “Election: 2026” series, this addition to our candidate interviews features District 9 Congressional Candidate Tim Peck (D). Leading up to the primaries, we will continue to release candidate interviews in order to keep you informed as you make your way to the ballot box.

Publisher's Note: The Washington County Times does not endorse political candidates. Our mission is to provide balanced and informative coverage of local politics so our readers can make their own informed decisions at the ballot box. We aim to give all candidates a fair opportunity to share their views and connect with the community. This Q&A is part of that commitment to open, unbiased political reporting.

---

District 9 Congressional Candidate Tim Peck (D)

Candidate's Campaign Website: www.timpeckforcongress.com

1. What inspired you to run for Congress?

I’m an emergency physician serving southern Indiana, where I treat patients from across our rural communities—regardless of their insurance or ability to pay. I live on a small farm with my wife, Missy, and our son, Cassidy, and like many families here, we’re building a life in a place we care deeply about.

I ran for Congress because I hear the same thing over and over again—from patients, from neighbors, and from the tens of thousands of doors I’ve knocked: it’s too expensive to work in this country. People are working hard, but it’s getting harder to get ahead.

The cost of healthcare, housing, childcare, education, groceries, gas, and interest rates keeps rising, and the systems that are supposed to support people aren’t built to keep up.

I have the experience to change that. I’ve led a bipartisan coalition in Washington, testified before the U.S. Congress, and helped build and implement telemedicine solutions in America for veterans, seniors, and people with disabilities—eventually expanding access for all of us just in time for COVID.

That work only succeeded because of collaboration across both parties, and I know how to bring legislators and stakeholders together to deliver real results for Hoosiers.

2. What personal or professional experience has best prepared you to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives?

I live and work in a healthcare desert, where our local rural hospital in Charlestown has closed and our 911 system is under real strain—where people have been told when they call 911 that no one is coming.

I work in the nearest emergency department to this community, and I take care of patients who drive over 45 minutes just to get to an emergency room. I’ve seen what happens when hospitals cut services, when labor and delivery units close—like they recently did at Harrison and Scott—and when communities lose access to care. Washington County still has St. Vincent—but like many rural hospitals, it’s under real financial pressure, and people feel that uncertainty.

That experience shapes everything. I’m not talking about policy in theory—I’m seeing the consequences in real time.

At the same time, I’ve worked on solutions at the national level. I’ve led bipartisan efforts in Washington, testified before Congress, and helped build telemedicine programs that expanded access to care across the country—especially for people who otherwise would have gone without it.

We need our tax dollars going directly to patient care—not to insurance executive bonuses, shareholder payouts, and corporate middlemen like prior authorization that stand in the way of care. And we need to get the influence of money out of politics so those priorities actually reflect patients, not profits.

I understand both the problem and how to fix it—and how to actually get results.

3. What are the top policy priorities you would focus on in your first year if elected to Congress, and why?

My focus is simple: it’s too expensive to work in this country.

In my first year, I would prioritize lowering the everyday costs that are putting pressure on working families—especially healthcare, housing, childcare, and prescription drugs. These aren’t abstract issues; they’re what I hear about every day from patients and families across southern Indiana.

That starts with fixing healthcare. Every American deserves access to care, and we can make that a reality if we bring down costs—cutting out waste and middlemen like prior authorization, strengthening rural hospitals, and making sure care is actually accessible, not just covered.

At the same time, we need to invest in the foundations of a stable life: affordable childcare so parents can work, housing people can afford, and workforce pathways—especially in the trades—that lead to good-paying jobs without requiring a four-year degree.

I would also focus on protecting and strengthening Social Security and Medicare, because people have paid into those systems and deserve to rely on them.

These priorities all come back to one goal: making it possible for people to work hard and actually get ahead again.

4. Washington County is facing interconnected challenges with substance abuse, family instability, and economic decline. What actions would you plan to take to support recovery programs, strengthen families and youth engagement, and promote workforce development to help our community achieve long-term stability and growth?

In the ER, I see the downstream effects: untreated addiction, unstable housing, lack of access to mental health care, and limited job opportunities all reinforcing each other. If we want long-term stability, we have to rebuild the system around people—not just fund isolated programs.

First, we need to expand access to mental health and addiction treatment, especially in rural areas. That means integrating services into primary care, emergency care, and community-based programs so people can actually get help when they’re ready—not weeks later. I’ve worked to pass telemedicine legislation at the federal level, and we can build on that by tying rural broadband investments directly to expanding access to mental health and addiction care.

We also need to meet people where they are. That includes evidence-based harm reduction approaches that reduce the spread of disease, keep communities safer, and help connect people to treatment and recovery.

But let me be clear—those tools only work if they’re paired with real access to addiction treatment, mental health care, and a path to recovery. The goal is always to help people get better and rebuild their lives. We saw this in Scott County—these approaches work when they’re done responsibly and paired with treatment, and they start to break down when we pull back on providing the care the community actually needs. The lesson is clear: we need to follow through and build a stronger, more consistent public health system for everyone.

Second, we need to support families early. Affordable childcare, school-based mental health services, and youth engagement programs give kids stability and give parents the ability to work and stay connected to their communities.

Third, we need real workforce pathways. That means investing in apprenticeships, trade programs, and partnerships with local employers so people can move directly into good-paying jobs without unnecessary barriers.

And all of this depends on keeping our local healthcare systems strong. When hospitals lose services or close, communities lose not just care—but jobs, stability, and a foundation for growth.

If we focus on rebuilding these systems together, we can create a path where people recover, families stay intact, and communities like Washington County can grow again.

5. How would you approach federal spending and the national debt—do you support spending cuts, tax increases, or a mix, and in what areas?

We need honesty here. The answer is a mix—but it has to start with better priorities.

I support cutting wasteful spending, especially where taxpayer dollars are being siphoned off by corporate middlemen, no-bid handouts, and inefficiencies that don’t improve people’s lives. In healthcare alone, we spend enormous amounts of money on administrative waste, insurance bureaucracy, and corporate profiteering instead of actual patient care.

At the same time, I support targeted public investment in areas that make the country stronger and reduce long-term costs—like healthcare access, childcare, education, infrastructure, and workforce development. Spending on these programs saves money down the line—and congresspeople need to stop thinking about what will get them elected next term and focus on what America needs after they’re gone. (Which is why I’m a strong supporter of term limits). Preventive care is cheaper than crisis care. Stable families are cheaper than failed systems.

On taxes, I believe working people are already carrying too much of the load. I do not think the answer is to squeeze more out of families who are already stretched. We should ask more from those at the top and close loopholes that reward wealth extraction over productive work.

So yes, I support a balanced approach: cut waste, invest where it matters, and build a tax code that is fairer and more aligned with long-term growth. The goal shouldn’t just be a smaller government on paper. It should be a government that spends smarter, serves people better, and stops making life more expensive in the first place.

6. What steps would you take to improve access to affordable health care in Indiana, including for Medicare and Medicaid recipients?

We need to start with a basic truth: everyone in Indiana deserves access to affordable healthcare.

Right now, we don’t have that—and the problem isn’t just coverage, it’s how the system is designed.

Medicare is a perfect example. People think it guarantees security, but I see something very different in the ER. Patients still go into debt. About one in five Medicare recipients carries medical debt. It doesn’t cover dental, vision, or hearing, and if someone needs long-term care or an extended ICU stay, they can lose everything they’ve worked for—including their home.

Medicaid is essential, but the reimbursement rates are so low that they’re contributing to the loss of services in rural communities. Hospitals cut labor and delivery, clinics close, and access gets worse.

At the same time, our current insurance exchanges are structured in a way that often subsidizes insurance companies without delivering affordable care to patients. And the people most likely to be uninsured are often those in rural areas—exactly where access is already the most limited.

Our veterans deserve better as well. We need to make sure the VA is fully funded, but also make it easier for veterans to access care in their own communities by allowing non-VA providers to be reimbursed. In rural areas, that flexibility can be the difference between getting care and going without it.

So the solution isn’t just expanding coverage—it’s fixing how care is delivered and paid for.

That means strengthening Medicare so it actually protects people, including addressing long-term care and closing gaps like dental, vision, and hearing. It means fixing Medicaid so it supports rural providers instead of driving them out of business. It means reducing administrative barriers like prior authorization that delay care and drive up costs. And it means continuing to expand telemedicine—paired with rural broadband—so people can access care without traveling hours.

If we do this right, we can build a system where people aren’t just insured—they can actually get care, afford it, and trust that it will be there when they need it.

7. Indiana’s voters are concerned about economic development and job growth. What federal policies would you support to attract and retain good jobs in our state?

It starts with a simple reality: it’s too expensive to work in this country—and that makes it harder for businesses to grow and for communities to thrive.

If we want to attract and retain good jobs in Indiana, we have to make it easier for people to live and work here.

That means lowering the big core costs that come out of our paychecks and hit both workers and employers—especially healthcare, childcare, and housing. When those costs are out of control, it’s harder for businesses to hire, harder for workers to stay, and harder for communities to grow.

We also need to invest in infrastructure that actually supports economic development—reliable broadband in rural areas, strong transportation networks, and stable energy systems. Companies won’t come, and people won’t stay, if the basics aren’t there.

Workforce development is critical. We should be expanding apprenticeships, trade programs, and partnerships with local employers so people can move directly into good-paying jobs without unnecessary barriers. Not every good job requires a four-year degree, and our policies should reflect that.

Agriculture is a cornerstone of our economy, and we need to treat it that way. That means supporting family farms, protecting farmland, and making sure farmers have fair access to markets, financing, and risk protection. Strong agricultural policy isn’t separate from economic development—it is economic development in much of Indiana.

At the same time, we need to support small businesses and local entrepreneurs—not just large corporations. Too often, federal policy is tilted toward the biggest players, while local businesses—the backbone of our communities—are left behind.

Finally, we need to align our tax and economic policies with long-term growth. That means rewarding productive work and investment here in the United States, not incentivizing outsourcing or financial engineering that doesn’t create real jobs.

If we focus on lowering costs, building the right infrastructure, strengthening agriculture, and creating real workforce pathways, Indiana can be a place where businesses grow and people can build stable, successful lives.

8. Climate change and energy policy continue to be debated nationally. What is your stance on federal climate action and energy independence?

Climate change is an emergency—and we need to treat it with urgency.

At the same time, we need a practical approach that keeps energy reliable, affordable, and made in America.

People in southern Indiana feel this directly—in their utility bills, in their jobs, and in whether businesses choose to invest here. So the goal isn’t ideological—it’s making sure we have an energy system that works.

That starts with energy independence. We should be producing more energy here at home so we’re not relying on unstable foreign supply chains.

We should also be investing in new energy technologies—including renewables and next-generation systems—because they create jobs, lower long-term costs, and strengthen our energy security. But how we do that matters. We should prioritize solar and other projects on brownfields, along highways, and in already-developed areas—not taking productive farmland out of use.

We also have to be honest about the transition. Communities that have powered this country for generations—especially in fossil fuel industries—shouldn’t be left behind. Any federal policy needs to include real investment in those communities, with pathways to new jobs and economic stability.

This isn’t about choosing one source over another—it’s about building an all-of-the-above energy strategy that keeps costs down, protects farmland, supports workers, and meets the urgency of the moment.

If we get this right, we can address climate change, lower costs, and create good-paying jobs here at home—all at the same time.

9. How do you plan to stay connected with the communities you represent, especially those with differing views from your own?

I’ve built this campaign by showing up.

I’ve knocked on tens of thousands of doors across southern Indiana and had conversations with people who agree with me, disagree with me, and everything in between. That’s not something I plan to stop doing if I’m elected—it’s how I understand what people are actually experiencing.

I live on a farm, and I spend time in the same spaces as the people I represent—whether that’s Cattlemen’s dinners, county council meetings, or local conversations about issues like solar development and government accountability. I don’t just show up where it’s easy—I show up where people care deeply, even when we don’t agree.

I’ve also co-founded Project Next, a local media initiative designed to reduce the fear and division that’s separating so many of us. We focus on local issues and connect them to national policy in a grounded way—bringing together people with different perspectives to have real conversations, not just talk past each other.

I spend time in the community outside of politics as well. I’ve been to places like the Washington County Warming Station, the Washington County 4H fair, and local coffee shops, diners and restaurants, listening and learning from people who are often left out of these conversations entirely.

I’ll continue holding town halls, office hours across the district, and making sure my team is accessible and responsive. But just as important, I’ll keep seeking out conversations with people who don’t share my views.

You don’t have to agree with someone to understand them—but you do have to show up.

10. Do you have any additional thoughts you’d like to leave with our readers?

We don’t have to accept things the way they are.

Right now, a lot of people feel like the system isn’t working for them—and they’re right. It’s too expensive to work, too hard to get ahead, and too difficult to access the basic things people need to build a stable life.

But that’s not inevitable. It’s the result of how we’ve designed these systems—and that means we can redesign them.

I’m not running to manage what we have. I’m running to build something better—grounded in the reality of people’s lives here in southern Indiana.

If we focus on lowering costs, strengthening our communities, and making sure our systems actually work for working families, we can create a future where people don’t just get by—they have a real chance to get ahead.

That’s the work worth doing.