New Jersey’s looming energy crisis, marked by a projected 20% price hike in electricity bills for the 2025/2026 delivery year, has cast a long shadow over the state’s political landscape.
Governor Phil Murphy’s ambitious offshore wind energy agenda, once heralded as a cornerstone of a green revolution, lies in tatters, with no operational turbines and a string of canceled projects. As the 2025 gubernatorial election approaches, Democratic candidates are grappling with their past support for Murphy’s vision while facing pressure to address the fallout.
Can they escape accountability by delaying rate hikes until after the November 2025 election? The answer hinges on public perception, the candidates’ ability to pivot, and the stark realities of the state’s energy policy failures.
The Energy Crisis and Murphy’s Offshore Wind Debacle
In April 2025, Governor Murphy urged the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to investigate potential market manipulation in the PJM Interconnection’s 2024 Base Residual Auction, which resulted in a nearly tenfold increase in capacity costs—from $2.2 billion to $14.7 billion. This translates to an estimated $20-$25 monthly increase for the average customer’s electric bill, a burden set to hit this summer. Murphy’s administration has pointed fingers at PJM, but critics argue the crisis is a direct consequence of over-reliance on an offshore wind industry that has failed to deliver.
Murphy’s clean energy goals—100% clean energy by 2035, with offshore wind targets escalating from 3,500 MW by 2030 to 11,000 MW by 2040—were bold but impractical. Major projects like Ørsted’s Ocean Wind 1 and 2 collapsed in 2023 due to inflation and supply chain issues, while Atlantic Shores lost its federal permits in March 2025 amid local opposition over tourism and environmental concerns.
The state’s fourth solicitation for offshore wind projects also failed in February 2025, with Murphy’s administration withdrawing financial backing, effectively dooming Atlantic Shores, the sole bidder. Despite early wins, such as the approval of 3,700 MW for Attentive Energy 2 and Leading Light Wind, not a single turbine spins off New Jersey’s coast, leaving the state’s clean energy goals in jeopardy and ratepayers facing higher costs without renewable offsets.
Democratic Candidates and Their Stances
The Democratic candidates for governor—Ras Baraka, Steven Fulop, Josh Gottheimer, Mikie Sherrill, Sean Spiller, and Steve Sweeney—have all, to varying degrees, aligned with Murphy’s renewable energy agenda, particularly his offshore wind initiatives. Their public statements and records show a shared enthusiasm for clean energy, but none have explicitly distanced themselves from the failed offshore wind projects or offered concrete plans to address the 2025 price hikes. Below is an overview of their stances, based on available information:
- Ras Baraka, Newark Mayor: Baraka has championed progressive policies, including environmental justice and green energy. His campaign emphasizes equity and sustainability, aligning with Murphy’s clean energy goals. However, he has not publicly addressed the offshore wind failures or the energy price hikes, focusing instead on housing and education. His budget priorities include adjusting tax brackets, but energy affordability remains unaddressed.
- Steven Fulop, Jersey City Mayor: Fulop has been vocal about infrastructure and sustainability, supporting Murphy’s offshore wind ambitions as part of a broader vision for a green economy. His campaign website highlights transparency and affordability but lacks specific proposals on energy policy or the 2025 crisis. Fulop’s long-standing endorsement of Murphy’s agenda ties him closely to the current administration’s failures.
- Josh Gottheimer, U.S. Representative: Gottheimer has positioned himself as a moderate, emphasizing affordability and job creation. He supports clean energy but advocates an “all-of-the-above” energy approach, suggesting a pragmatic shift away from sole reliance on offshore wind. While he has not explicitly criticized Murphy’s policies, his focus on lowering utility bills could offer a way to sidestep blame, though he has not detailed how to address the price hikes.
- Mikie Sherrill, U.S. Representative: Sherrill has a strong record on environmental issues, supporting renewable energy and climate action. Her campaign aligns with Democratic values, including Murphy’s clean energy goals, but she has not commented on the offshore wind setbacks or the energy crisis. Her high favorability among Democrats may help her avoid scrutiny, but her silence on the issue could become a liability.
- Sean Spiller, Montclair Mayor and NJEA President: Spiller, backed by the powerful New Jersey Education Association, has emphasized education and labor but endorsed Murphy’s clean energy vision. His campaign has not addressed the energy crisis or offshore wind failures, focusing instead on progressive priorities like school funding. His relative newcomers status may shield him from direct association with Murphy’s policies.
- Steve Sweeney, Former State Senate President: Sweeney has a complex relationship with Murphy, having supported offshore wind development while criticizing the administration’s execution. He has not disavowed clean energy but has called for better management of energy projects. Sweeney’s budget priorities include tax relief, which could resonate with voters hit by price hikes, but his long tenure in state politics ties him to the broader Democratic establishment.
Can Democrats Delay the Rate Hikes and Dodge Accountability?
The idea of delaying the 20% rate hikes until after the November 2025 election is a political maneuver that could, in theory, shield Democratic candidates from voter backlash. By postponing the financial sting, candidates could campaign on promises of affordability and clean energy without immediate accountability for the crisis. However, this strategy is fraught with risks and unlikely to fully absolve them of responsibility.
First, the mechanics of delaying rate hikes are challenging. The PJM auction results are already public, and utilities are preparing to pass costs to consumers. Any delay would require coordinated action between the state, NJBPU, and PJM, potentially involving legal or regulatory hurdles. Murphy’s call for a FERC investigation suggests an attempt to shift blame, but without swift resolution, voters may still feel the squeeze before the election. Moreover, transparency advocacy groups and Republican opponents are likely to highlight any attempt to manipulate the timeline, framing it as election-year cynicism.
Second, the candidates’ universal support for Murphy’s offshore wind dreams ties them to the policy’s failure. While none have explicitly endorsed delaying rate hikes, their campaigns have leaned on broader affordability narratives—Gottheimer’s utility bill cuts, Baraka’s tax bracket reforms, Sweeney’s tax relief—that could dovetail with a delay strategy. However, voters are increasingly skeptical of promises without results. The absence of operational turbines, coupled with high-profile project cancellations, has eroded public trust in New Jersey’s clean energy agenda. Environmentalists, once Murphy’s allies, are disillusioned, with figures like Jeff Tittel of the Sierra Club calling the offshore wind setbacks “devastating.” Labor unions, expecting thousands of jobs, are similarly frustrated.
Third, Republican candidates—Jon Bramnick, Jack Ciattarelli, Ed Durr, and Bill Spadea—are already capitalizing on the energy crisis. Ciattarelli, who nearly unseated Murphy in 2021, has criticized Democratic energy policies and promised tax cuts and school choice, positioning himself as a pragmatic alternative. Bramnick, a moderate, emphasizes party unity and affordability, while Spadea, a Trump-endorsed conservative, rails against green energy mandates. Durr, though less prominent, leverages his populist appeal to attack establishment failures. These candidates will likely frame any rate hike delay as a Democratic cover-up, keeping the issue alive in voters’ minds.
The Path Forward: Can Democrats Pivot?
To mitigate the crisis’s political damage, Democratic candidates must balance acknowledging the offshore wind failures with credible plans to address energy affordability. A delay in rate hikes could buy time, but it risks being seen as a dodge unless paired with substantive policy proposals. Candidates like Gottheimer, with his “all-of-the-above” energy stance, could advocate for diversifying energy sources—solar, nuclear, or natural gas—to reduce reliance on unproven offshore wind. Sweeney’s experience and pragmatic tone could position him to propose reforms to the NJBPU’s solicitation process, ensuring better vetting of projects. Baraka and Fulop, tied to urban progressive bases, might focus on energy assistance programs for low-income households, leveraging Murphy’s existing utility bill support initiatives.
Ultimately, escaping the 2025 energy crisis’s shadow requires more than delaying rate hikes. Voters will demand accountability for the billions invested in a windless future and answers for the bills they’ll soon pay. Democratic candidates must confront their role in endorsing Murphy’s vision while charting a new course—one that prioritizes affordability, reliability, and realistic clean energy goals. If they fail to do so, the energy crisis could define the 2025 election, handing Republicans a powerful weapon in a state already trending competitive.