Tahesha Way

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

Wayne Route 23 Transit Station offers both train and bus service. Now that I’m no longer Lieutenant Governor, I expect to rely on these transit options like I have done in the past and I appreciate how important it is for daily commuters.

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

NJ-11 is served by an extensive network of NJ Transit rail and bus lines, but too often the system falls short of riders’ needs. Delays, service disruptions, and overcrowding are still a regular experience for far too many commuters. Just recently I have been out at train stations talking to voters and see at least one delayed train every single time. These challenges didn’t happen overnight, they’re the result of years of inconsistent investment and funding being delayed or diverted instead of used to address long-standing issues. A reliable, well-funded transit system is essential, and its failures should never force people to add to road congestion because they can’t count on public transportation to get them where they need to go. This is all the more important for Northern New Jersey with FIFA coming in just a few months, transportation needs to be on time and reliable.

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

The federal government should provide sustained, predictable funding that allows transit agencies to plan for the long term rather than operate crisis to crisis. Federal dollars should support core operating assistance, bring aging infrastructure into a state of good repair, expand rail and bus capacity where demand is growing like here in NJ-11, and modernize fleets. Funding should also prioritize resilience against extreme weather and climate impacts, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and keep fares affordable for working families. Just as important, federal investment must come with safeguards to ensure funds are used efficiently and cannot be redirected away from transit needs as has happened in the past. Strong federal leadership is essential to delivering a transit system that is reliable, accessible, and capable of supporting the region’s economy.

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

Driving regional improvements requires consistent, structured collaboration. I would work closely with neighboring members of Congress, state and local elected officials, transit agencies, labor leaders, business groups, and rider advocates to align priorities and move projects forward together. These lines don’t follow district lines and you need to be able to work with everyone to do what’s best for riders. That means convening stakeholders early in the planning process, sharing data across agencies, and setting clear, measurable goals so everyone is working toward the same outcomes. I would also push for stronger coordination among federal, state, and regional authorities to reduce duplication, streamline approvals, and accelerate delivery. When agencies and leaders operate as partners instead of silos, we get better projects, better service, and better results for the people who rely on our transportation system every day.

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 Amtrak funding that improves reliability and capacity on the shared infrastructure New Jersey riders depend on every day. That means investing in basic state-of-good-repair work, modern signaling and power systems, and eliminating bottlenecks that cause cascading delays. Funding should also support projects that increase resilience to extreme weather and improve on-time performance across the corridor. Targeted, predictable investment in Amtrak-owned assets is essential to delivering a smoother, more reliable experience for NJ-11 train riders.

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?

Efforts to undermine congestion pricing through federal leverage set a dangerous precedent and distract from the real work of improving mobility in the region. That said, congestion pricing is not something I support when it fails to deliver clear, tangible benefits to the commuters most affected — particularly New Jersey riders who often lack viable alternatives. For policies like congestion pricing to succeed, any revenue generated must be transparently reinvested in improving cross-Hudson transit capacity, reliability, and affordability. When people are incentivized to adapt how they travel, government has an obligation to ensure the system they are being pushed toward is one they can depend on.

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 a national infrastructure priority, not a discretionary project, and its completion is vital to maintaining reliable rail service between New Jersey and New York City. The existing tunnel is well past its intended lifespan, and failure to replace it would jeopardize daily commutes, regional commerce, and the broader Northeast Corridor economy. Ensuring Gateway moves forward requires firm, long-term federal commitments that cannot be reversed on a whim, clear legal protections for funds already authorized by Congress, and continued coordination among federal, state, and regional partners. Major infrastructure decisions must be driven by safety, capacity, and economic necessity not shifting political agendas.

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?

Decisions about federal support for transit expansions should be grounded in measurable public value. That includes whether a project meets demonstrated travel demand, improves access for underserved communities, relieves pressure on overcrowded roads, and supports long-term economic growth while reducing environmental impacts. Advancing projects like the Bergen–Hudson Light Rail extension and the Glassboro line requires early coordination among state agencies, local governments, and federal partners to present a strong, unified proposal.

I would focus on building that alignment, navigating the federal funding process, and keeping projects moving by cutting through unnecessary delays so transit expansions that benefit NJ-11 can become reality.

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?

Federal investment in bus electrification is critical to modernizing NJ Transit and reducing the environmental and health impacts of traditional diesel buses. Funding should cover not just the vehicles themselves but also the upgrades to electrical infrastructure at bus depots that make fleet electrification feasible. These investments create cleaner communities, lower operating costs over time, and support good-paying jobs in construction and clean energy. By committing to sustained, protected federal funding, we can ensure NJ Transit can transition responsibly and reliably to a zero-emission fleet.

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 believe states must retain the ability to set stricter air quality standards under the Clean Air Act. Programs like New Jersey’s Advanced Clean Cars and Advanced Clean Trucks have improved public health, reduced pollution, and encouraged the adoption of electric and low-emission vehicles. Weakening this authority would hinder progress on climate and air quality, limit innovation in clean transportation, and put residents’ health at risk. Federal policy should support states’ leadership in advancing cleaner, safer transportation options rather than undercutting it.

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 keep the U.S. auto industry competitive, Congress should provide long-term, reliable support for domestic EV and battery production. This includes restoring tax incentives tied to American-made vehicles, investing in battery research and supply chains for critical materials, and supporting workforce development to ensure good-paying manufacturing jobs stay in the U.S. Federal procurement and targeted funding can create steady demand for clean vehicles, helping American automakers compete globally. Without these policies, we risk falling behind China and other international competitors, losing both economic opportunity and leadership in the clean transportation sector.

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 responsibility to fully fund programs like the Clean School Bus Program and deliver that support on schedule. Electric school buses cut harmful emissions, improve children’s health, especially in communities most affected by pollution, and reduce long-term costs for school districts. Delays or gaps in funding undermine Congress’s intent and slow progress toward cleaner, safer school transportation. Federal investments should be predictable, prioritized for districts with the greatest needs, and structured so schools can confidently plan and transition to an electric fleet.