Former Van Drew Challenger Joe Salerno Discusses $1.5 Million Outside Spending Push, Campaign Fundraising and South Jersey Congressional Race

In a WOND interview, the 2024 Democratic nominee describes the difficulties of challenging an incumbent, explains how super PACs operate and acknowledges areas where Van Drew has delivered for the district.

ATLANTIC COUNTY, N.J. — With Election Day approaching, former Democratic congressional candidate Joe Salerno says the sudden arrival of major outside political spending in South Jersey's congressional race illustrates both the financial challenges facing political newcomers and the influence national organizations can have on local elections.

Salerno, who challenged Republican U.S. Rep. Jeff Van Drew in 2024, discussed the contest between Van Drew and Democratic challenger Zack Mullock during an October 28 appearance on Off The Press with Scott Cronick on News Talk 1400 & 92.3 WOND.

The conversation covered a reported $1.5 million outside advertising commitment, the relentless fundraising demands placed on congressional candidates, the distinction between traditional political action committees and super PACs, and the advantages of incumbency.

Salerno also offered an unusually candid assessment of his own campaign experience, including the difficulty of attracting financial support before national political organizations begin paying attention.

His observations come as the November 3 election approaches in New Jersey's 2nd Congressional District, which includes Atlantic, Cape May, Cumberland and Salem counties, along with portions of Gloucester and Ocean counties.

Van Drew, a Republican seeking a fifth term in Congress, faces Mullock, the Democratic mayor of Cape May, and independent candidate Ramon Mora Jr.

$1.5 Million Outside Spending Commitment Draws Attention

One of the biggest developments in the congressional contest has been the entrance of a national Democratic-aligned super PAC into the race.

Project 218, a political committee associated with Democratic efforts to gain seats in the U.S. House, has launched a major advertising effort opposing Van Drew.

The New Jersey Globe reported October 22 that the organization planned to spend approximately $1.5 million on broadcast television advertising in the district.

Federal Election Commission records compiled through October 26 show approximately $1.59 million in independent expenditures across the entire congressional contest, including primary-election spending.

Approximately $1.4 million in general-election outside spending had been reported in support of Mullock or opposition to Van Drew, compared with approximately $65,000 supporting Van Drew.

Those figures represent independent political expenditures, not money donated directly to either candidate's campaign.

The distinction was a central part of Salerno's interview.

"Super PAC money is unlimited, but you don't actually get that," Salerno explained. "The Super PAC does what it wants to do."

Under federal election law, super PACs can raise and spend unlimited amounts on independent political activity, but they cannot coordinate those expenditures with the candidates they support.

That means an organization can purchase advertising benefiting a candidate without giving the candidate control over the advertising campaign.

Salerno said the influx of money can nevertheless have a significant effect on the political environment surrounding a race.

Salerno Describes the Fundraising Burden

Cronick asked Salerno whether he experienced the same fundraising difficulties that Mullock has described during his campaign.

"100%," Salerno responded.

Salerno said congressional candidates can spend enormous amounts of time contacting potential donors rather than speaking with voters or concentrating on policy.

He described the process of making fundraising calls as particularly unpleasant.

"It's awful. Absolutely awful to call up people," Salerno said.

He also discussed a recent installment of his Facebook commentary series, Joe Salerno's Front Porch, in which he and former Vineland Democratic chair Bonnie Martin demonstrated the fundraising calls that campaigns make.

Salerno said the response from potential donors can change dramatically once national organizations begin showing interest in a contest.

"All of a sudden your conversations with donors you don't know changes remarkably," he said.

The observation illustrates a challenge for congressional candidates who are not already well known.

They need money to communicate with voters, but attracting substantial financial support can depend on first convincing donors that their campaigns deserve attention.

That dynamic can favor incumbents, who generally enter campaigns with established fundraising networks, name recognition and years of relationships with contributors.

Van Drew Holds Significant Fundraising Advantage

Federal campaign-finance figures through October 14 show Van Drew's campaign had raised approximately $2.41 million during the election cycle.

Mullock's campaign reported approximately $961,000 in receipts over the same period.

Van Drew had spent approximately $2.28 million, compared with approximately $856,000 spent by Mullock.

The incumbent also reported substantially more cash remaining for the final weeks of the election.

Van Drew had approximately $895,000 cash on hand, while Mullock reported approximately $105,000.

Those totals do not include independent spending by outside organizations.

Consequently, the arrival of major super PAC advertising has changed the overall volume of political communication in the district without eliminating the financial difference between the candidates' own campaign committees.

Salerno said outside spending can make a significant difference for a challenger who otherwise lacks the resources to communicate broadly with voters.

However, he emphasized that outside organizations operate independently and make their own decisions about how to spend their money.

Corporate PAC Money Is Not the Same as Super PAC Spending

The interview also addressed Mullock's position on accepting corporate political action committee contributions.

Cronick initially questioned whether Mullock had promised not to accept super PAC money.

The conversation clarified an important distinction: Mullock's stated position concerned corporate PAC contributions, not independent expenditures by super PACs.

Traditional political action committees can make contributions directly to federal candidates, subject to contribution limits and other federal election rules.

Super PACs, by contrast, cannot contribute directly to candidates but may independently spend unlimited amounts supporting or opposing them.

Salerno suggested that rejecting corporate PAC contributions can be an easier commitment for a challenger than for an established incumbent because corporate-affiliated political committees are often less interested in funding candidates who are not already in office.

"For a challenger race, you're not getting offers of Corporate PAC money," Salerno said.

He characterized the pledge as a practical political position rather than necessarily a major financial sacrifice.

That assessment was Salerno's opinion based on his campaign experience, not a finding about the motives behind Mullock's pledge.

The Federal Election Commission's rules confirm that traditional PAC contributions and independent super PAC spending are legally different forms of political activity.

A candidate's refusal to accept contributions from corporate PACs does not prevent an independent super PAC from spending money to support that candidate.

What Do the Polls Actually Show?

The interview also addressed competing claims about the closeness of the congressional contest.

Salerno said he had not personally seen Mullock's internal polling.

He also suggested that campaigns have reasons to keep unfavorable survey results private.

But those observations should not be mistaken for independent evidence of what either campaign's internal polling shows.

A survey conducted October 7-10 for House Majority PAC by Impact Research, and subsequently reported by the New Jersey Globe, showed Van Drew leading Mullock 50% to 40%.

The survey also indicated that a substantial portion of voters were unfamiliar with Mullock.

The poll was conducted for a Democratic-aligned organization, and its findings represent a snapshot of surveyed voters during that period, not a prediction of the election outcome.

During the interview, Salerno referenced Mullock's public claims about a closer internal survey but acknowledged he had not examined that polling himself.

No independent verification of those particular internal numbers was presented during the WOND discussion.

Salerno Offers Perspective From His 2024 Campaign

Salerno's commentary carries an additional dimension because he personally ran against Van Drew in the previous congressional election.

A Democrat, Salerno has continued discussing politics and public policy through his Front Porch Facebook page, where he examines campaign practices, energy costs and other issues.

He told Cronick that the purpose of the page is to explain what happens behind the scenes of political campaigns.

He said voters often see the finished advertisements and political messages without understanding how campaign strategists develop them.

Salerno also described the tension between the emotional appeals used in campaigns and the practical policy discussions he believes deserve greater attention.

Although he frequently criticizes Van Drew, Salerno acknowledged during the interview that he has his own political preferences.

"I ran as a Democrat," he said.

He also said he has significant disagreements with the current Republican Party.

Those affiliations and views are important context for his assessment of the congressional race.

Salerno Acknowledges Van Drew's Record of Delivering Federal Resources

Despite his criticism of Van Drew's political approach, Salerno acknowledged that the congressman has helped secure resources for South Jersey.

"I don't think anybody can reasonably say that he's not good at bringing money back to the district," Salerno said.

Later in the conversation, Cronick asked Salerno to identify areas where he believed Van Drew had done a good job.

Salerno cited the congressman's involvement with the Atlantic City Housing Authority and federal assistance for road improvements in Atlantic City.

"I think his fight for Atlantic City Housing Authority, the people who live in those projects, I think it's been effective and well-intentioned," Salerno said.

He also acknowledged Van Drew's role in securing road funding.

"I think him helping get the funding for the road improvement project in Atlantic City, that was a big deal," Salerno said.

Those comments provided a contrast with Salerno's broader criticism of the congressman's political rhetoric and policy positions.

Van Drew has repeatedly emphasized his ability to work with federal officials and secure funding for projects in the district.

Cronick raised that issue directly, asking whether voters should consider the advantages of having an experienced member of Congress with established relationships in Washington.

Salerno acknowledged the value of experience and federal funding but argued that political temperament and the ability to work across party lines also matter.

That was Salerno's political assessment, rather than an objective conclusion about either candidate.

Experience, Political Differences and the Election Ahead

The interview ultimately returned to the question of what qualities voters should consider when choosing a member of Congress.

Cronick raised Van Drew's seniority, federal relationships and history of bringing resources to South Jersey.

Salerno focused on the importance of bipartisan cooperation and his disagreement with Van Drew's alignment with President Donald Trump.

The two perspectives reflect different considerations in a congressional election: the practical advantages of an established incumbent and the policy and governing priorities offered by a challenger.

For voters, the campaign also presents competing arguments about affordability, federal spending, health care, energy policy and the direction of the federal government.

Van Drew is campaigning on his record and his relationships in Washington, while Mullock is seeking to offer a different approach to representing the district.

Independent candidate Ramon Mora Jr. is also on the ballot.

Early voting is underway, and Election Day is Tuesday, November 3.

Salerno's appearance offered a view of the election from someone who has experienced the financial and organizational challenges of running against Van Drew.

His comments also underscored a distinction that can become obscured during expensive political campaigns: A candidate's own fundraising, spending by independent political organizations and public claims about campaign momentum are three separate things.

Understanding those differences can help voters evaluate the political advertising they encounter during the final days before the election.

Joe Salerno appeared October 28 on Off The Press with Scott Cronick, airing weekdays from 4 to 6 p.m. on News Talk 1400 & 92.3 WOND.