To the Editor:

I recently had the opportunity to attend a debate among the four candidates for state assembly in New Jersey’s 16th legislative district. While I am grateful for all of the candidates for taking the time to make their views known, the result was a clear contrast in many areas between Democratic candidates Andrew Zwicker and Maureen Vella and Republican incumbents Jack Ciattarelli and Donna Simon.

Zwicker and Vella supported returning funding to our broken pension system so that our state’s credit can be restored, while Ciattarelli touted his plan that transfers much of the state’s debt onto the shoulders of municipal governments. On the issue of gun violence, the Democrats argued for common sense gun control measures, including expanded background checks and longer waiting periods, which could help prevent the sort of mass shootings that have occurred far too frequently in recent years. Simon, who has received an A-plus rating from the NRA, chose instead to advocate for harsher sentencing measures that would do nothing to deter the murderers responsible for these tragedies.

On the environment, Zwicker, a Princeton University physicist, spoke strongly for investments in renewable energy while his opponents suggested a more cautious approach of waiting for other states and nations to take the lead. Mr. Ciattarelli grudgingly acknowledged that human activity was probably a factor in global climate change, but his argument that renewable energy technology will improve significantly in the coming years, and is therefore not worth significant investment now, is deeply misguided. Our state should be pushing hard for innovation and should be a leader, not a follower, in this area.

The debate brought home to me how key the differences are between the candidates and how important it is to support new voices with new ideas.

You can find the debate on the website of the Princeton League of Women Voters.

Samuel Weiss

Forester Drive