Gothamist77%

Utility companies  and their political donations  are top of mind in NJ elections 0%

By Mike Hayes0%

3/27/2026, 5:01:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 34 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Left Leaning Bias, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Quote-first Misdirection, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 23.4% saturation with 254 hits. Analysis detected 2,771 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,086 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the article peer group.

New Jersey Democrats hope political donations from utility companies will become a liability for a vulnerable, two-term incumbent Republican in this year’s midterm elections, as electricity bills have spiked higher than any other state in the country. 
But Democrats have their own ties to the industry. 
Rep. 
Tom Kean Jr., a Republican who represents New Jersey’s 7th Congressional District, has received more than $100,000 in contributions from utility companies and their political action committees over his roughly 25-year political career, according to federal campaign finance data. 
His donors include PACs for prominent energy companies PSE&G, NRG Energy and FirstEnergy. 
Together, utility industry interest groups have given $84,000 to Kean’s federal campaigns and more than $30,000 for his state legislative campaigns. 
Kean served more than two decades in the state Assembly and Senate. 
In 2025 alone, he received more than $26,000 from utility-backed funders to bolster his current run, raising questions about his willingness to crack down on rising energy costs. 
Monthly utility bills in New Jersey rose 16.9% last year, an average annual increase of $260 per family, according to a report by Democrats on the Congressional Joint Economic Committee. 
Four Democrats are vying for their party’s nomination to unseat Kean in November. 
So far, none have taken money from utility companies or their associated PACs, according to campaign finance data. 
But Rebecca Bennett  the candidate who has led fundraising efforts in this year’s Democratic primary race  has received more than $13,000 in contributions since 2025 from individual donors who work in the energy sector. 
“New Jersey families are opening electric bills they can barely afford, and Tom Kean Jr. is opening checks from the utility industry, that tells you everything you need to know about whose side he's on,” said Democrat Michael Roth, a former Biden administration official who is vying for the Republican’s seat. 
Dr. 
Tina Shah, another Democrat in the race, accused Kean of being “completely in [the] pocket” of the energy industry. 
“It's unacceptable, because in New Jersey we've seen the sharpest spike in energy bills in the 50 states last year. 
So why the heck is our representative not actually advocating for us to lower costs like he specifically said he would,” she said. 
In response to the money Bennett has received from energy executives, her campaign manager, Om Savargaonkar, said the candidate “doesn’t take a dime of corporate PAC money and will stand up to the utility companies to lower costs for New Jersey families.” 
Kean’s campaign pushed back, accusing Democrats of hypocrisy. 
“In the same period they’re attacking Congressman Kean, those same PACs gave $2.3 million to the [Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee],” said Harrison Neely, a strategist for Kean. 
“Are our opponents going to refuse that support? 
Of course not. 
They’ve been desperately chasing it. 
So they can spare us the outrage.” 
The DCCC, a national organization that recruits and raises funds for Democrats for key congressional races, declined to comment. 
The organization has yet to back a specific candidate in the race, but is expected to throw a lot of support behind the Democratic nominee. 
The DCCC has named the district as one of its top targets this election cycle. 
“These utility companies are raking in record profits.” 
 Alex Ambrose, New Jersey Policy Perspective 
Utilities have also given generously to New Jersey Gov. 
Mikie Sherrill's campaigns. 
PSE&G’s PAC donated a combined $20,000 to her congressional runs in 2022 and 2024, and she received an additional $13,000 as a congressmember from energy and utility PACs that have also helped fill Kean's coffers. 
During her successful run for governor in 2025, Sherrill received contributions from top energy industry executives, including several renewable energy companies, petroleum distributors and the New York Power Authority. 
All gave her campaign the maximum individual donation of $5,800. 
The Sherrill administration did not respond to a request for comment. 
During her campaign for governor, Sherrill pledged to lower utility costs for New Jerseyans. 
William Smith, a spokesperson for the utility PSE&G, said all donations made through its PAC are fully disclosed. 
“We generally support incumbents from both parties in New Jersey communities where we operate,” he said. 
A March 2026 report from the Energy and Policy Institute found PSE&G made $1.7 billion in profits in 2025 from its New Jersey operations. 
Another utility in the state, Exelon, profited by $188 million. 
“These utility companies are raking in record profits while small businesses and families are struggling to pay their electricity bills,” said Alex Ambrose, an energy policy analyst with New Jersey Policy Perspective, one of the state's most prominent progressive think tanks. 
“When private for-profit companies get involved in elections and politics, it is virtually never to the benefit of everyday people.” 
Democrats view Kean as a vulnerable incumbent in a race that could help them flip control of Congress later this year. 
He has been a staunch supporter of President Donald Trump, who has grown increasingly unpopular in New Jersey. 
Some New Jersey Republicans have started to turn on Kean. 
In Roxbury, a township he represents, the mayor and an all-GOP council criticized him for not fighting to stop the Trump administration from purchasing a warehouse that it plans to use as an immigration detention center. 
The congressmember has also come under fire for voting for Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which some energy policy analysts project will cause electricity bills to rise even higher. 
The Center For American Progress, a nonpartisan policy institute in Washington, D.C., found the law will cost New Jersey residents $160 more per year for electricity on average starting in 2026, because it terminated federal investments in clean energy. 
The think tank Energy Innovation projected energy costs in New Jersey would rise up to 8% as a result. 
Kean has been the subject of six-figure ad buys by outside political groups hitting him over this issue. 
The Cook Political Report recently moved its projection for Kean’s seat from “lean R” to “toss-up,” citing a tough environment for Republicans this midterm cycle. 
His district spans from the Arthur Kill tidal strait that separates New Jersey from Staten Island in the east, across 95 Garden State municipalities to the Delaware River on the state’s western border. 
“Kean’s in one of the closest and most competitive U.S. 
House districts in the country, and winning it is a key part of Democrats' path to flipping the House in 2026,” New Jersey Democratic strategist Simon Persico said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 15.8%Mike Hayes: 5.7%Gothamist: 2.7%Confirmation Bias15.8%This article: 9.4%Mike Hayes: 2.8%Gothamist: 1.5%Anchoring Bias9.4%This article: 14.7%Mike Hayes: 3.4%Gothamist: 3.6%Availability Heuristic14.7%This article: 3.9%Mike Hayes: 1.4%Gothamist: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic3.9%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Mike Hayes: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias4.1%This article: 11.6%Mike Hayes: 14.6%Gothamist: 8.4%Framing Effect11.6%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 1.5%Gothamist: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.5%Mike Hayes: 3.0%Gothamist: 3.6%Optimism Bias4.5%This article: 6.5%Mike Hayes: 0.9%Gothamist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias6.5%This article: 23.4%Mike Hayes: 11.3%Gothamist: 8.5%Negativity Bias23.4%This article: 7.0%Mike Hayes: 2.6%Gothamist: 2.6%Self-Serving Bias7.0%This article: 5.0%Mike Hayes: 1.4%Gothamist: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error5.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.5%Gothamist: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 4.2%Mike Hayes: 5.8%Gothamist: 2.1%In-Group Bias4.2%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 4.0%Gothamist: 2.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.1%Mike Hayes: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.3%Recency Bias5.1%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 1.7%Mike Hayes: 2.5%Gothamist: 1.0%Ad Hominem1.7%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.8%Mike Hayes: 5.4%Gothamist: 4.4%Appeal to Authority9.8%This article: 0.7%Mike Hayes: 0.7%Gothamist: 1.2%False Dilemma0.7%This article: 2.7%Mike Hayes: 0.6%Gothamist: 0.8%Slippery Slope2.7%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 4.6%Mike Hayes: 6.1%Gothamist: 3.8%Hasty Generalization4.6%This article: 1.7%Mike Hayes: 1.5%Gothamist: 0.3%Red Herring1.7%This article: 0.7%Mike Hayes: 2.1%Gothamist: 0.8%Bandwagon0.7%This article: 13.2%Mike Hayes: 11.4%Gothamist: 6.4%Appeal to Emotion13.2%This article: 2.1%Mike Hayes: 0.5%Gothamist: 0.7%Begging the Question2.1%This article: 19.6%Mike Hayes: 2.4%Gothamist: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)19.6%This article: 2.5%Mike Hayes: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.1%Tu Quoque2.5%This article: 3.6%Mike Hayes: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.4%Burden of Proof3.6%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 3.2%Mike Hayes: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Composition/Division3.2%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 1.4%Gothamist: 2.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 5.3%Mike Hayes: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.1%No True Scotsman5.3%This article: 4.7%Mike Hayes: 1.0%Gothamist: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.7%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.7%Mike Hayes: 0.3%Gothamist: 1.2%Unattributed Quote4.7%This article: 17.0%Mike Hayes: 1.7%Gothamist: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection17.0%This article: 13.1%Mike Hayes: 2.8%Gothamist: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice13.1%This article: 4.4%Mike Hayes: 0.5%Gothamist: 1.5%Indoctrination4.4%This article: 20.7%Mike Hayes: 7.9%Gothamist: 1.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias20.7%This article: 0.0%Mike Hayes: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%Mike Hayes: 0.2%Gothamist: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…3.9%

1086 words analyzed.

Speakers

8speakers33%attributed speech733writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageMichael Roth • 51 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageTina Shah • 19 words • 100.0% coverageTina Shah • 20 words • 0.0% coverageTina Shah • 23 words • 0.0% coverageOm Savargaonkar • 42 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageHarrison Neely • 27 words • 100.0% coverageHarrison Neely • 8 words • 0.0% coverageHarrison Neely • 3 words • 0.0% coverageHarrison Neely • 5 words • 0.0% coverageHarrison Neely • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageAlex Ambrose, New Jersey Policy Perspective • 8 words • 100.0% coverageAlex Ambrose, New Jersey Policy Perspective • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWilliam Smith • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWilliam Smith • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageAlex Ambrose, an energy policy analyst with New Jersey Policy Perspective, one of the state's most prominent progressive think tanks • 41 words • 100.0% coverageAlex Ambrose, an energy policy analyst with New Jersey Policy Perspective, one of the state's most prominent progressive think tanks • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageSimon Persico • 10 words • 0.0% coverageSimon Persico • 28 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Michael Roth

100%flagged-word coverage
51 attributed words14% of attributed speech86% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Michael Roth: 100.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+94.7 ptsWriter: 5.3%Michael Roth: 100.0%100.0%Politically Left Leaning B-25.1 ptsWriter: 25.1%Michael Roth: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-15.6 ptsWriter: 15.6%Michael Roth: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-3.8 ptsWriter: 3.8%Michael Roth: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.