Van Drew, Mullock Clash in Heated South Jersey Congressional Debate Over Economy, Iran and Health Care

Candidates trade accusations during Stockton University forum as rising costs, immigration, beach protection and data centers take center stage.

GALLOWAY, N.J. — Republican Congressman Jeff Van Drew and Democratic challenger Zach Mullock engaged in a contentious debate Thursday night, repeatedly accusing each other of misleading voters while presenting sharply different views on the economy, health care, energy policy and the war in Iran.

The October 22 debate, co-hosted by Stockton University's William J. Hughes Center for Public Policy and The Press of Atlantic City, brought the candidates for New Jersey's 2nd Congressional District together less than two weeks before the November 3 election.

The forum, held without an in-person audience and streamed to viewers, was intended to provide voters with a discussion of the issues facing South Jersey.

Instead, it frequently became a series of personal confrontations, with moderators repeatedly intervening to keep the candidates on schedule.

Mullock, the mayor of Cape May, sought to portray Van Drew as closely aligned with President Donald Trump and responsible for policies he said have made life more expensive for South Jersey residents.

Van Drew defended his congressional record, emphasized federal investments he said he helped secure for the district and repeatedly challenged the accuracy of Mullock's accusations.

Cost of Living and Health Care Spark Early Confrontation

The debate opened with questions about affordability, an issue affecting households throughout Atlantic, Cape May, Cumberland and other counties in the district.

Mullock blamed federal health care policy, tariffs and the conflict in Iran for increasing household expenses.

"The first thing we have to do is reverse the policies of Mr. Van Drew and Donald Trump," Mullock said.

He accused the congressman of supporting legislation that would reduce federal spending on Medicare and Medicaid, arguing that changes to health coverage could particularly affect lower-income residents.

Van Drew forcefully rejected the characterization.

"Never voted to cut Medicare," he said. "There was never even a vote on cutting Medicare that ever existed."

He also pledged not to support reductions in Social Security benefits.

"I will never vote, ever, to cut Medicare," Van Drew said. "I will never vote to cut Social Security."

The congressman acknowledged changes affecting some Medicaid recipients, describing work, education and volunteer requirements for certain able-bodied adults.

Mullock urged viewers to examine analyses from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, arguing that the financial consequences of the legislation were more extensive than Van Drew acknowledged.

The candidates' competing claims about federal health care legislation were not independently resolved during the debate.

Iran War Produces Some of the Sharpest Exchanges

The war in Iran generated particularly heated exchanges.

Mullock repeatedly accused Van Drew of supporting the conflict through congressional votes opposing measures to restrict military operations.

"It's a war of stupidity," Mullock said.

He questioned what the conflict had accomplished for South Jersey residents and connected it to rising fuel prices.

Van Drew disputed the assertion that he had voted to authorize the war, distinguishing between a vote to begin military action and votes on measures that would require ending or limiting hostilities.

"There was never a vote for the war in Iran," Van Drew said.

He argued that an immediate withdrawal could endanger American military personnel and destabilize the region.

However, Van Drew also said the United States needs a strategy for ending its involvement.

"As we go into this next session, we have to have an end game," he said. "It is time to end this, and I believe that we will."

The dispute highlighted a central disagreement: Mullock characterized Van Drew's votes as support for continuing the conflict, while Van Drew maintained that his decisions were intended to protect deployed troops.

Electric Bills and Offshore Wind

Both candidates acknowledged that rising electric rates have become a serious problem for South Jersey residents.

Van Drew blamed state energy policies and decisions by New Jersey regulators, while also reiterating his opposition to offshore wind projects near the Jersey Shore.

"Our electric rates are too high," Van Drew said.

He argued that offshore wind development would increase costs and harm the environment and fishing industry.

Mullock countered by pointing to Van Drew's earlier support for offshore wind while serving in the New Jersey Legislature.

Mullock said he had voted against an offshore wind resolution as Cape May mayor because of environmental and commercial fishing concerns, but he continued to support renewable energy where appropriate.

"We need to go full steam ahead with solar panels," Mullock said.

He also supported wind energy in locations where it would not damage the environment or interfere with commercial fishing.

Van Drew advocated a broader mix of energy sources, including conventional fuels and renewables.

Beach Replenishment and Shore Protection

For Atlantic and Cape May county residents, one of the most locally significant exchanges involved beach replenishment and coastal flooding.

Mullock criticized the timing and planning of recent beach restoration projects, arguing that work conducted during the summer tourism season disrupted Shore communities.

"We need a comprehensive plan, a 10-year plan that has a lot of utilities and jetties and infrastructure," Mullock said.

He called the recent approach chaotic and said Cape May had not received expected replenishment work.

Van Drew defended his record on securing federal assistance for coastal protection.

"$99 million we brought in this year," he said.

The congressman argued that beach replenishment has historically depended on multiple funding mechanisms, including supplemental appropriations.

He also promoted legislation intended to establish a more permanent funding source for beach restoration.

The exchange revealed agreement that federal participation is essential, but disagreement over whether the current approach provides sufficient long-term certainty for coastal communities.

Vineland Data Center Becomes Flashpoint

The candidates also clashed over data center development, particularly concerns involving a project in Vineland.

Mullock accused Van Drew of failing to protect residents from potential environmental and energy-cost consequences associated with the growing industry.

He also alleged that a contractor connected to a data center project had contributed to Van Drew's campaign.

Van Drew denied accepting contributions from a data center company.

"I never took money from any data center anywhere ever," he said.

When Mullock identified a contractor he said had contributed money, Van Drew acknowledged knowing the contractor and said the individual had worked on numerous unrelated projects.

"Yes, he has given money," Van Drew said.

But he maintained that the contribution did not establish a financial relationship with a data center operator.

Van Drew also said he had supported bipartisan legislation intended to prevent data centers from shifting certain electricity costs onto other consumers.

The competing allegations about campaign contributions, the contractor's business relationships and federal legislation warrant separate examination of campaign finance records and legislative documents.

Immigration and Public Safety

Both candidates expressed support for border security and removing violent criminals from the country, but differed significantly over immigration enforcement.

Van Drew called for closer cooperation between federal immigration authorities and New Jersey officials.

He criticized the state's immigration policies and argued that a lack of cooperation forces federal agents to conduct more enforcement operations in communities.

Mullock said immigration enforcement should focus on dangerous individuals while respecting due process and treating people humanely.

He emphasized the importance of immigrant workers to South Jersey agriculture and hospitality businesses.

"We need to recognize our reliance on immigrants," Mullock said.

He also called for a pathway to citizenship for certain longtime residents.

The discussion included disputes over recent immigration enforcement incidents and the treatment of immigrant communities in Vineland, Bridgeton and Atlantic City.

Social Security Produces a Point of Agreement

Despite their frequent disagreements, the candidates found some common ground on Social Security.

Mullock proposed increasing the amount of earnings subject to Social Security payroll taxes and changing how the program's trust funds earn interest.

Van Drew said he was open to examining the taxable earnings cap.

"One of the ideas is looking at the cap for sure," Van Drew said. "I actually agree with that."

He argued that maintaining the program would require bipartisan cooperation and multiple policy changes.

Both candidates pledged to protect Social Security benefits.

Town Halls and Access to Voters

Another contentious moment came when moderators asked whether the candidates would commit to holding open, in-person town hall meetings.

Mullock criticized Van Drew for not regularly conducting the type of public meetings where constituents can question elected officials directly.

As Cape May mayor, Mullock said, he values hearing from residents during municipal meetings.

Van Drew said he communicates regularly with constituents through telephone calls and other channels, including telephone town halls.

He expressed concerns about confrontations and safety at some in-person congressional town halls.

"If we can get to the point that they're safe and nobody gets hurt, I'm absolutely supportive of it," Van Drew said.

The two candidates continued arguing about whether Van Drew's approach provides sufficient public access.

A Bitter Exchange Over the Epstein Files

The debate also featured a prolonged disagreement over congressional efforts to release documents related to Jeffrey Epstein.

Mullock challenged Van Drew over his decision not to sign a discharge petition intended to bring legislation directly to the House floor.

Van Drew responded that he had supported the underlying legislation but disagreed with the procedural approach.

"I was a co-sponsor of the bill, for God's sake," Van Drew said.

He argued that the measure should have gone through the committee process before reaching the House floor.

Mullock repeatedly pressed him on the discharge petition, while Van Drew maintained that his support for the bill was being misrepresented.

The moderators eventually moved the discussion to other issues.

Closing Arguments Focus on Experience and Change

In his closing statement, Van Drew emphasized his record of constituent service and his willingness to fight for South Jersey.

"I will run into the fire," Van Drew said. "I have run into the fire. I will continue to run into the fire."

He also warned against what he described as the direction of the Democratic Party.

Mullock concluded by asking voters to evaluate whether their lives had improved during the past two years.

"Are you better off than you were two years ago?" Mullock asked.

"If you are, God bless you. I wish you the best. But if you're not, I'm asking for your vote."

The debate offered voters a clear contrast in political style as well as policy priorities.

Van Drew presented himself as an experienced incumbent with relationships and a record of delivering federal assistance to the district.

Mullock argued that voters should hold the congressman accountable for national policies and rising household expenses.

The often-combative exchange also demonstrated how difficult it has become for the candidates to find common ground, even on issues where they share broad goals.

The candidates are competing for the 2nd Congressional District seat in the November 3 general election.

The debate was moderated by Alyssa Maurice of Stockton University's Hughes Center and Nicholas Huba of The Press of Atlantic City.

A recording of the forum is expected to be available through the Hughes Center's YouTube channel.