Tom Malinowski

What public transit options are available to you from your New Jersey residence, and do you regularly use any of these services?

My home in South Orange is very close to NJ Transit rail and bus service, including the Morris & Essex Line, as well as PATH and Amtrak connections traveling into New York and Washington. Although I don’t have an abundance of time on the campaign trail, I enjoy the easy access to New York and hopefully will be commuting by train to Washington regularly very soon.

What is your impression of how well public transit serves NJ-11?

Despite being essential to daily life for many NJ-11 residents, public transit is falling short of what our community deserves. While many of us benefit from strong rail lines and bus routes that connect our communities to NYC and throughout the state, riders regularly face delays, overcrowding, aging infrastructure, and unreliable service. Too many commuters feel they have no real alternative to driving, which worsens congestion and raises costs for families. These challenges aren’t accidental—they’re the result of decades of underinvestment and political neglect.

What role do you believe the federal government could and should play to fund transit needs in NJ-11?

The federal government must be a full and reliable partner in funding transit in NJ-11, because the scale of our infrastructure needs far exceeds what the state or local governments can manage alone. When I previously served in Congress on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, I saw firsthand how decisive federal investment can unlock transformative projects, including my work delivering funding for the Gateway Tunnel and Portal North Bridge, which are critical to the entire Northeast Corridor. The federal government should provide robust, predictable funding for capital projects, state-of-good-repair investments, and climate-resilient upgrades, and protect those funds from political interference.

Sustained federal leadership is essential to improving reliability, expanding capacity, and ensuring transit remains affordable and accessible for NJ-11 riders, and I intend to bring this leadership when I return to Congress.

How would you partner with other organizations, elected officials, and stakeholders to drive regional improvements and inter-agency cooperation?

Regional transit improvements require active coordination and not siloed decision-making. When I previously served in Congress on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, I worked closely with state and local officials, NJ Transit, Amtrak, the Port Authority, labor, and advocates to advance major projects like the Gateway Tunnel and Portal North Bridge. Through relentless advocacy, I also convinced NJ Transit to expand direct service to New York on the Raritan Valley Line, including near peak trains, something that was very important to my constituents.

As a Member of Congress, I would continue to convene key agencies and stakeholders, align federal funding streams, and push for clear accountability and timelines so projects move faster and deliver real improvements for NJ-11 riders.

Train riders in NJ-11 rely on Amtrak-owned infrastructure. What Amtrak funding would you prioritize to improve the experience for New Jersey train riders?

I would prioritize funding for the Northeast Corridor, including state-of-good-repair investments, signal and power upgrades, and capacity improvements through projects like Gateway. Improving reliability for NJ Transit riders depends directly on modernizing Amtrak-owned infrastructure.

New York City’s congestion pricing program has achieved an 11% reduction in auto traffic into New York City, but is still under attack by the Trump administration. a) Do you oppose the Administration’s attempts to punish NYC for imposing the congestion pricing fee? b) Do you support requiring NYC to share some of the funds raised by the program with NJ to help improve bus and train service between NY and NJ, so that more NJ commuters can avoid the congestion pricing fees?

I oppose the Trump Administration’s attempts to punish New York City for implementing congestion pricing. The federal government should not use its power to retaliate against states or cities for pursuing locally adopted transportation policies.

At the same time, any congestion pricing program must be fair to New Jersey commuters, many of whom have limited transit alternatives. I support requiring that a meaningful share of the revenue be invested in cross-Hudson bus and rail improvements that directly benefit NJ riders. If commuters are being asked to change their behavior, they must be given reliable, affordable transit options to do so. Regional challenges demand regional solutions, not unilateral decisions or political interference.

President Trump has vowed to cancel federal funding for the Gateway Rail Tunnel project, which is needed to preserve commuter rail traffic between NJ and NYC. What is your view of the project? What approaches should be considered to ensure the continuation of the project?

The Gateway Rail Tunnel is absolutely essential to preserving and expanding commuter rail service between New Jersey and New York, and canceling it would be economically reckless and deeply harmful to the entire Northeast Corridor. I passed legislation in Congress to advance Gateway and the Portal North Bridge, and I know how critical sustained federal partnership is to its success. To ensure the project continues, Congress must lock in multi-year federal funding, exercise rigorous oversight, and protect infrastructure investments from partisan sabotage. And New Jersey must be ready to take the federal government to court if funding approved by Congress is withheld by the president. Critical transportation projects should be guided by engineering and public need—not political vendettas.

New Jersey is seeking federal funding to extend the Bergen/Hudson Light Rail system to Englewood and the south Jersey River Line Light Rail System to Glassboro. What factors should be considered for funding projects like this? How would you approach advancing transit expansions like this and others within NJ-11?

Funding decisions for transit expansions should be driven by clear public benefit: projected ridership, congestion reduction, economic development, equity, and climate impact. Projects like the Bergen–Hudson Light Rail extension to Englewood can improve access to jobs and education while reducing car dependence in growing communities. I worked to advance major regional projects, and I would apply that same approach here—partnering with local leaders, NJ Transit, and federal agencies to secure funding, streamline approvals, and ensure projects are delivered on time and on budget for NJ-11 riders.

New Jersey Transit’s bus electrification goals require substantial federal funding to upgrade the electrical infrastructure in the agency’s bus garages needed to charge new electric transit buses. How do you view federal funding investments in such projects?

I actually led the effort in the House to get increased funding for low and zero emission buses into the bipartisan infrastructure bill. Further federal investment in bus electrification infrastructure is essential and long overdue. Electrifying NJ Transit’s bus fleet will cut air pollution, lower long-term operating costs, and improve public health—especially in communities that have borne the brunt of diesel emissions. The federal government should fund not only the buses themselves, but the electrical upgrades needed at bus garages to make electrification possible. These are exactly the kinds of climate, infrastructure, and jobs investments Congress should prioritize, and they should be protected from political interference so agencies like NJ Transit can plan and execute responsibly.

The Trump Administration is seeking to end California’s ability under the Federal Clean Air Act to set stricter automobile pollution standards than the federal standards. New Jersey along with many other states has traditionally adopted California’s stricter standards, helping keep our air cleaner and encouraging the sales of electric passenger and commercial vehicles under such programs as Advanced Clean Cars and Advanced Clean Trucks, which were implemented under the Murphy administration. What is your view on maintaining California and other states' ability to set stricter air quality standards?

I strongly support maintaining California’s authority under the Clean Air Act to set stronger vehicle pollution standards and for states like New Jersey to adopt them. These standards have been essential to protecting public health, reducing smog and climate pollution, and accelerating the transition to cleaner vehicles through programs like Advanced Clean Cars and Advanced Clean Trucks. Efforts by the Trump administration to strip states of this authority undermine decades of settled law and put polluters ahead of people.

Congress should defend states’ rights to protect their residents’ health and support clean transportation innovation.

Last year, the Republican budget ended federal EV tax incentives. In response, US automakers scaled back their investments in new EV and electric battery production. This puts our domestic auto industry at a competitive disadvantage to the Chinese, whose EV models are increasingly gaining a larger share of the world wide auto marketplace. What policy approaches should Congress consider to maintain US global competitiveness in the auto industry?

To maintain U.S. global competitiveness, Congress must restore and strengthen incentives that support domestic EV and battery manufacturing. That means long-term, predictable tax credits tied to U.S. production, workforce development, and strong labor and environmental standards. We should invest in domestic supply chains for critical minerals, expand federal support for battery research and innovation, and use federal procurement to create stable demand for American-made clean vehicles. Abandoning these investments, as Republicans have done, cedes leadership to China and weakens our industrial base. Smart federal policy can ensure the next generation of autos is built by American workers here at home.

Similarly, the EPA has delayed funding for the fourth and fifth year of the Clean School Bus Program grants and rebates, which were authorized by Congress in the previous administration ($1 billion/year). What is your perspective on the federal government's role in funding electric school buses?

The federal government has a critical responsibility to fully fund and timely deliver the Clean School Bus Program as authorized by Congress. Electric school buses reduce air pollution, protect children’s health—especially in overburdened communities—and lower long-term operating costs for school districts. Delaying or withholding these funds undermines congressional intent and slows progress toward cleaner, safer transportation. The federal government should provide predictable, multi-year funding, prioritize districts with the greatest health and environmental burdens, and ensure agencies implement programs efficiently so schools can plan and transition with confidence.