This election presents more than a choice between two candidates. It presents two fundamentally different ideas about government, liberty and America’s future.
Five principles for standing against political chaos and defending representative government.
Voters should be able to compare those ideas without caricature. Adam Hamawy has published a detailed priorities page. Gregg Mele has set out a different standard: protect constitutional government, enforce the law, empower families, defend America and require public institutions to produce measurable results.
Source and method: Hamawy’s current published priorities explicitly call for the policies summarized below. His page was accessed October 23, 2026. Phrases in quotation marks are direct quotations; the other descriptions of his platform are faithful paraphrases. Statements of Gregg Mele’s position describe the Mele campaign’s published platform and governing conclusions.
1. Immigration and law enforcement
Hamawy: His priorities use the headings “Abolishing and prosecuting ICE” and “Dismantling DHS.” The page says ICE agents and administration officials should be brought before congressional committees and prosecuted, while DHS should be broken apart. It also supports an achievable path to citizenship and protection from deportation for DACA recipients and mixed-status families.
Mele: Enforce immigration law, end sanctuary policies, restore operational control at the border and prioritize dangerous offenders. That must be done with due process and equal justice. Legal immigration should be repaired so applicants who follow the rules are treated predictably and fairly.
The governing difference: Abolishing enforcement institutions before replacing their essential functions is not reform. Gregg’s approach is to correct failures, punish proven misconduct and keep the public-safety mission intact.
2. Constitutional government
Hamawy: His agenda supports Supreme Court term limits and an ethics code, but also says he would “expand the Court.” It calls for abolishing the Electoral College and states that “Trump and his cabinet must be removed.”
Mele: Preserve judicial independence, constitutional checks and balances, federalism and the separation of powers. Impeachment is a constitutional remedy for specific, provable misconduct—not a generalized promise to remove a president and Cabinet as a class.
The governing difference: Gregg believes institutions should restrain every party. Changing the structure of the Court or the presidential system to secure a preferred political result risks turning constitutional safeguards into partisan instruments.
3. Economic policy and affordability
Hamawy: His published program supports taxing wealth, reparations, Medicare for All, cancellation of student and medical debt, tuition-free public college, universal childcare, paid leave and a larger federal role across healthcare, education, housing and care infrastructure.
Mele: Restore spending discipline, expand reliable American energy, strengthen competitive markets and preserve consumer choice. Relief should be targeted, transparent and judged by outcomes. Opportunity grows when families and businesses can keep more control over their own decisions.
The governing difference: The question is not whether families need relief. They do. The question is whether Washington should promise benefits without disclosing the full tax, debt, inflation and administrative costs. Gregg’s test is simple: publish the price, name the payer and measure the result.
4. Israel, defense and foreign policy
Hamawy: His page calls for “Significantly cutting the trillion dollar Pentagon budget,” cutting military aid to Israel, enforcing an arms embargo, characterizing Israel’s actions as genocide and apartheid, and supporting a Palestinian Right of Return.
Mele: Maintain military readiness while auditing defense spending and demanding value for taxpayers. Stand unequivocally with Israel, oppose Hamas terrorism and reject moral equivalence between a democratic ally defending civilians and a terrorist organization that targets them.
The governing difference: Oversight is necessary; strategic retreat is not. Gregg supports humanitarian aid with safeguards, a strong American defense and moral clarity about the difference between an ally’s right of self-defense and terrorism.
5. Parents, education and biological reality
Hamawy: His priorities propose rebuilding a stronger Department of Education, expanding federal funding and national policy across schools, supporting the Transgender Bill of Rights and backing the Transgender Health Care Access Act.
Mele: Protect parental rights, educational transparency and local authority. Put academic excellence, safe schools and honest civics first. Every person deserves equal human dignity, while public policy should remain grounded in biological reality and parents should have a meaningful voice in consequential decisions affecting their children.
The governing difference: Gregg would keep core education decisions close to students, parents, teachers and communities instead of converting disputed social questions into one-size-fits-all federal policy.
6. Energy, climate and federal power
Hamawy: His platform advocates a Green New Deal approach, rapid decarbonization with deadlines for ending fossil-fuel use, a Civilian Climate Corps, renewed federal intervention in housing and large public-sector investments and jobs programs.
Mele: Deliver affordable, reliable energy; encourage technological innovation; strengthen resilient infrastructure; protect the environment and let private enterprise compete. Policy must recognize physical limits, grid reliability, household costs and economic reality.
The governing difference: Gregg favors stewardship and innovation without making working families absorb the cost of an ideologically fixed timetable or a sweeping transfer of authority to Washington.
Reform What Is Broken. Protect What Works.Protect liberty. Enforce the law. Empower families. Strengthen America. Demand results.
Does Adam Hamawy’s Humanitarianism Include Israeli Children?
A humanitarian standard that protects only one population is not a humanitarian standard. It is a political preference dressed in moral language.
Adam Hamawy’s campaign platform calls Israel’s conduct “genocide,” describes Israel as practicing “apartheid,” supports cutting military aid, and advocates a Palestinian “Right of Return.” Yet the indictment on his priorities page does not name Hamas or the October 7 massacre that began this phase of the war.
The omission becomes more serious when civilian defense is at stake. Jewish Insider reported that Hamawy opposed Iron Dome and argued that Israelis should “feel the effects of war.” Iron Dome does not select military targets in Gaza. It intercepts rockets aimed toward people in Israel—Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Arab, and Bedouin alike.
Hamawy’s campaign answered that he knows the cost of war, saved children in Gaza, and wants wars to end. His medical work deserves recognition. But that answer does not resolve the policy question: How does withholding defensive protection from Israeli families advance humanitarian principles?
Gregg Mele’s position is morally coherent: protect civilians, defeat terrorism, support humanitarian relief with safeguards, preserve Israel’s ability to defend its people, and demand accountability for American assistance. Palestinian children matter. Israeli children matter. A doctor—and a Congressman—should be able to say both without hesitation.
Gregg’s challenge: If a defensive system saves civilians from rockets, explain why denying that protection is humanitarian.
FEC receipts • Political committees • Out-of-state money
Follow the money
Who Is Financing Adam Hamawy?
The most revealing campaign-finance pages are not the nearly blank end of a disbursement report. They are the receipts showing which political committees and which parts of the country are supplying the money.
Political committee money
$90,806.40
Reported from other political committees
FEC financial summary through October 14, 2026
Justice Democrats PAC$5,000March 31
314 Action Fund$5,000May 11
Congressional Progressive Caucus PAC$5,000June 1
Medicare for All$5,000June 1
SEIU COPE$5,000June 26 total
Selected direct committee receipts, not a complete list. ActBlue conduit entries are not treated here as PAC contributions.
Itemized individual money by state
50.9%
$613,406.41 came from outside New Jersey
FEC state table covering January 1–June 30, 2026
Texas$83,223.66
California$82,294.75
New York$78,157
Illinois$60,455
Ohio$56,250
The FEC table attributes $1,204,198.91 in individual contributions by state for this period: $590,792.50 from New Jersey and $613,406.41 from elsewhere.
None of this is illegal, and out-of-state contributions are common in federal campaigns. It is nevertheless relevant to voters deciding whether a campaign is principally rooted in NJ-12 or amplified by national political and ideological networks. The proper response is disclosure: show the names, dates, amounts and source records, then let voters judge.
The $7,900 rent question still deserves an answer
Hamawy for New Jersey’s April 15 FEC filing records a March 9 payment of $7,900 to Princeton Plastic Surgeons with the stated purpose “Rent.” Jewish Insider reported that Hamawy is the practice’s sole owner and that his campaign intended to continue paying the practice $7,900 each month for campaign office space.
Hamawy’s campaign says it consulted a compliance firm, that campaigns must pay market rate to candidate-linked businesses, and that the space was needed for volunteers in an expensive market. Those explanations deserve to be included. They also make the next step obvious.
Publish the lease. Describe the space. Show the comparable rents used to establish the price. The FEC payment and reported ownership do not, by themselves, establish excessive rent, personal use, or illegality. But a candidate who campaigns on transparency should not ask voters to accept a recurring payment to his own business on trust alone.
Gregg’s challenge: Identify the national committees financing the campaign, disclose how much came from outside New Jersey, and give voters the lease documents needed to judge the candidate-linked rent.
A Lawful Veterans’ Benefit—and a Fair Request for Transparency
Veterans deserve every benefit the law promises. Candidates seeking federal office also owe voters a clear account of significant public benefits they receive.
South Brunswick records reviewed by the campaign identify exemption-related adjustments connected to Hamawy’s residence. New Jersey’s disabled-veteran property-tax exemption is a lawful benefit requiring qualifying service and discharge, residence, ownership and occupancy, and VA certification of 100% permanent and total service-connected disability. The state’s published criteria do not include an income test.
The available municipal ledger does not establish the complete VA benefit category, a reliable current annual savings figure, cash refunds, or wrongdoing. That means the honest case is not that Hamawy “refused to pay” taxes. The honest case is that a candidate asking to write federal law should answer a narrow transparency request.
Will Hamawy voluntarily disclose the exemption’s approval date, its financial value, and confirmation that the required eligibility documentation was supplied—with private medical information redacted?
The standard: Respect the benefit. Protect medical privacy. Disclose the public facts.
Iron Dome Saves Lives. Why Would Anyone Oppose It?
A defensive system that intercepts rockets aimed at population centers is not a blank check for any government. It is protection for human beings.
Jewish Insider reported that Adam Hamawy opposed Iron Dome and argued that Israelis should “feel the effects of war.” That is a policy position with a human consequence: fewer intercepted rockets and greater danger to civilians.
Oversight of foreign assistance is legitimate. Debate over military strategy is necessary. But defensive protection should not be confused with approval of every action taken by an allied government. Iron Dome protects families while leaders argue, negotiate, and make policy.
Gregg’s position is clear: stand with Israel, protect civilians, insist on accountability, and never treat exposure to rocket fire as a moral lesson for children.
The question Hamawy should answer: What humanitarian purpose is served by making civilians less safe?
File image: Gaza tunnel, 2014—not the European Hospital site
Evidence & national security
A Hospital Is Not a Shield for Terror
Humanitarian law protects hospitals. Terror groups must not be allowed to exploit that protection—and public officials should follow the evidence wherever it leads.
Reuters reported in June 2025 that Israel revealed a tunnel beneath Gaza’s European Hospital and said the body of Hamas military leader Mohammed Sinwar was found there. The report is a warning against absolute claims made before facts are fully established.
Two principles can be true at once: medical patients and personnel deserve protection, and armed groups must be condemned when they use protected sites or nearby infrastructure for military purposes. Serious leadership does not erase either truth for political convenience.
Gregg will support humanitarian aid with safeguards, defend Israel’s right to defeat terrorism, and demand evidence-based oversight of every American commitment.
The standard: Protect patients. Expose terror infrastructure. Follow verifiable facts—not slogans.
What Voters Should Know About Adam Hamawy’s Radical Ties
Candidates for federal office should answer plainly for their associations, endorsements, and public record—especially when public safety and extremism are involved.
The campaign believes voters deserve a direct accounting of the people and organizations surrounding every candidate. Scrutiny is not guilt by association; it is the ordinary transparency owed by anyone asking to exercise federal power.
Gregg’s standard is straightforward: condemn terrorism and antisemitism without qualification, support law enforcement, and tell voters where you stand before Election Day—not after.
Gregg’s line: Public office requires clarity, judgment, and accountability.
Results over ideology.
Campaign contrast
Stop the Radical Agenda: Vote Gregg Mele for Congress
New Jersey families should not be forced to choose between affordability, safety, and basic individual liberty.
Washington’s ideological extremes create expensive mandates, weaken public confidence, and distract from the practical work families need: lower costs, safer communities, better schools, and accountable government.
Gregg offers a different approach—country before party, results before ideology, and a willingness to challenge any policy that fails the people of the district.
The choice: Practical representation rooted in the district, not a national ideological script.
Reform what is broken. Protect what works.
Government reform
A Chainsaw Is No Substitute for a Scalpel
Broken institutions need reform, accountability, and competent leadership—not slogans about abolishing the people and systems that keep the country safe.
Federal agencies should never be beyond criticism. Waste should be cut. Abuses should be investigated. Missions should be clear, measurable, and constitutional. But eliminating a necessary function without a workable replacement is not reform. It is abandonment.
Gregg will approach government like a taxpayer and a problem-solver: identify what is failing, protect what is essential, fix what can be repaired, and end what cannot justify its cost.
Gregg’s approach: Reform with precision. Protect essential missions. Measure the result.
Every promise has a price.
Promises & price tags
“Free” Is Not a Funding Plan
Every federal promise is paid for—through taxes, borrowing, inflation, reduced choice, or some combination of all four.
Campaigns too often advertise benefits without disclosing the bill. New Jersey families deserve the whole proposal: its ten-year cost, who pays, what choices disappear, and how success will be measured.
Gregg will not confuse compassion with an unlimited federal credit card. He will support practical help that reaches the people it is meant to serve and insist that every major program publish honest costs and measurable outcomes.
Before Congress votes: Publish the price. Name the payer. Define the result.
United States Constitution, page one • National Archives
Gregg’s governing standard
The Constitution Comes First
A representative’s first loyalty is not to a party, a caucus, a donor, or an online movement. It is to the Constitution and the people.
Gregg believes federal power should be limited, legible, and accountable. Congress should write clear laws, defend civil liberties, protect national security, and stop handing hard decisions to unelected bureaucracies.
That standard does not guarantee easy votes. It guarantees honest ones: read the bill, disclose the cost, respect the limits of federal authority, and explain the decision directly to the district.
Country before party. Results before ideology. The Constitution before both.
Your vote decides who signs the check.
Civic participation
If You Don’t Vote, Someone Else Signs the Check
Government keeps spending, taxing, and making decisions whether you participate or not.
Every election determines who writes the laws, approves the spending, and answers for the results. Staying home does not stop those decisions; it simply hands your share of the decision to everyone who does vote.
Check your registration, learn the deadlines, decide how you will vote, and encourage the people around you to do the same. Participation is how taxpayers turn frustration into accountability.
Washington’s promises still reach the kitchen table.
Affordability
Washington Can’t Spend Its Way to Affordability
Another federal promise is not relief if it arrives with more debt, higher prices, and no measurable result.
New Jersey families feel federal policy in grocery aisles, utility bills, rent, mortgage payments, and taxes. Real relief starts with spending discipline, reliable American energy, fewer barriers to building and business, and competitive markets that give families choices.
Gregg will judge legislation by its full cost and its real-world effect—not by the size of the press release attached to it.
Bottom line: Lower the cost of living by addressing the sources of cost, not by sending taxpayers another bill.
The Foundation Is Strong—Now Finish the Work
The latest official figures show an economy with real underlying strength: second-quarter real GDP grew at a 2.2 percent annual rate, private domestic demand grew 4.6 percent, and industrial production advanced at a 2.8 percent annual rate in the third quarter.
That momentum matters, but Gregg will not pretend the job is finished while prices remain high and too many paychecks are stretched thin. Congress must protect growth with reliable American energy, competitive markets, tax and regulatory certainty, and disciplined federal spending—then judge success by whether families actually gain purchasing power.
Gregg’s standard: Preserve the growth. Restrain Washington. Make prosperity reach the kitchen table.
Every proposal should disclose its cost, its funding, its owner, and the result taxpayers should expect.
Congress too often measures commitment by dollars announced instead of outcomes delivered. Programs expand, deadlines move, and responsibility disappears. Gregg believes legislation should be written so voters can understand what was promised and later determine whether government kept that promise.
That means plain-language cost estimates, measurable goals, regular audits, and the courage to repair or end what does not work.
Gregg’s test: What will it cost? How will it be paid for? Will it actually work?
