Tonight on NJ PBS news.

They are chemicals found in everything from cookware to clothing to even fast food containers.

And now a new repor shows these dangerous so-called forever chemicals are widespread in surface water all across the country, including in each of Jersey's 21 counties, impacting all of our drinking water.

Tonight we break down the serious threat to public health and how Jerse is aggressively fighting back.

Also tonight, student outrage running high at Rutgers University after they learned about a new AI base surveillance system on campus.

The university never announced the project, but now says it's all about keeping campus safe.

Critics say it's an invasion of privacy and another example of surveillance going to far.

Tonight we speak with the investigative reporter who broke the story.

And with the midterms less than two weeks away.

Tonight we talked with the Republican challenger in the 11th district, who is facing off against Democrat incumbent and Lilia mejia.

We will talk with Randolph Town Council member Joe Hathaway and his plans for affordability and health care, plus the issues where he breaks from President Trump.

Can Hathaway bounce back from his 21 poin loss to Mahia earlier this year?

And PBS news starts now.

This is NJ PBS news with Rob Nelson.

Good evening everybody.

So called foreve chemicals are used in everything from nonstick cookwar and waterproof clothing to food packaging and firefighting foam.

They get that name because once they enter the environment, they barely break down.

Now, a new report has found these chemicals in more than 90% of the spot tested in New Jersey's rivers, lakes and streams that 78 out of 86 locations.

The testing does cover all 21 counties in our state and these findings do raise him obvious questions.

What does this mean for the water we drink, the fish we eat?

And can Jersey keep the contamination from getting even worse?

NJ PBS Spotlight Washington reporter Ben has been on the story and is joining us now.

The word of this report and your reporting, you know, mad the rounds here in Jersey media.

It is an alarming headline.

We've all hear about these forever chemicals.

Talk a little bit first though about the structure of this report.

It was national in nature.

And this obviously we're going to talk about Jersey.

But this is sounding more and more like an urgent and national concern.

It was national in nature.

Rob.

About 1600 sites were sampled.

Environmental groups di this research, but they pulled.

And predictably, there might be some criticism that these folks have, an advocacy angle to push here, and they certainly do.

But they were pulling data from the US EPA from water, water sources, water data from the federal government, and stitching together this pretty grim looking picture, which is that PFAS are ubiquitous.

And in particular, this was a report that looked at surface water, as you pointed out.

So we're talking ponds, rivers, lakes, dreams.

That's important to mentio because those are water bodies that go directly into what we drink, what we bathe in, what we use to shower that that is, those are bodies of water that have direct connection to our lives.

And that's, I think, in particular, why this was so alarming to a lot of people.

No, absolutely.

And just to be clear, as your article points out, I'll quote you're writing directly.

The chemicals have been linked to kidney cancer, liver problems, high blood pressure, weakene immune systems and complications during pregnancy.

So these are not minor medical issues here.

And your article also makes it clear that it's an industry wide problem that does require some action by the federal government.

How did the report land there where you are in D.C.?

And what is Congress doing on this front?

Because again, it's a national problem.

It is a national problem.

And there was some momentum to your direct question about how this report landed.

This has not made any sort of national rounds.

This is picked up in environmental circles and and in local circles.

But everyone's out campaigning.

There was momentum under th Biden administration at the EPA and on the Hill here on Capitol Hill to do something about this.

This was a rare issue where there was bipartisan buy in.

Because this, again, affects everyone in all 435 congressional districts.

There are stories.

People are aware of this.

It is in pop culture.

What this means.

So there was a pus and there was a bit of momentum that has all fizzled out unde the second Trump administration.

There are pockets of bipartisan compromise, all single out Brian Fitzpatrick.

He he's a Republican from a Philadelphia area seat just across the river from Jersey.

But by and large, there is no sort of serious momentum here to rein in this pollution.

No serious momentum.

Well, and let me ask you this just kind of a living room couch question here.

These plants that make these items that we've talked about, the fast food containers, the waterproof clothing, so on and so forth.

Is it literally an issue o the plants that make this stuff?

And then these chemicals are just ending up in the, in, in the water and the wastewater coming from these plants into these other areas that, that in turn feed our drinking water.

Is it really that simple?

To an extent, yes.

It's but it's really the chemicals themselves.

These are fast chemicals as they're known.

And that is a that is a broad chemical labe for a whole family of chemicals.

There are thousands of them.

Actually, scientists don't know exactly how many of these chemicals exist, but they are so stubborn an they don't break down in nature because the bonds within them.

If we all think back to high school chemistry, they're incredibly strong.

And if you imagine sort of like those, those molecule sets we might have built in science class, the molecules just don't break apart.

And so they don't disintegrate in nature.

And I'll give you a quote that mayb puts this in good perspective.

I interviewed for this story someone who didn't work on this study, Robert Lombok, who's a professor at Rutgers Public Health School, and he said, basically, this stuff is everywhere there, even in rainwater.

Once the water once this flow of water cycles through, it's it's basicall impossible to water finds a way.

Right?

Water finds every crevice.

That's why we have this problem.

Thus the forever, forever forever chemicals, as you said.

And thank you for reminding me that I got a D in high school chemistry, so I, I appreciate that.

Ben Hugh reporting tonigh from DC about literally an issue that affects us all.

It doesn't get more basic or fundamental than the water we drink.

Ben, as always, appreciate you great reporting and your time.

Same to you.

Rutgers University has used security cameras for years, but new reporting shows the school has now spent at least 1.5 million bucks on technology that can do more than simpl record what happens on campus.

The AI powered system can recognize faces, read license plates and follow a person or vehicle from camera to camera.

It can also alert the cops when it detects things like a visible weapon or a growing crowd, or other activity it considers to be unusual.

Most of the Rutgers students we spoke with expressed serious privacy concerns.

Rutgers purchasing things and doing things behind the backs of the student body is obviously extremely scary.

They're pretty much evasive and I feel like as a community has like a student population even more voice full and not be more like blac and comes to things like this.

Yeah, cameras do keep us safe, but not these cameras.

These cameras are known for giving wrong information.

I believe that cameras ar a great component for students to understand tha security is a major issue.

Here is the nj.com investigative reporter who uncovered this purchase, which was not publicly disclosed.

Here now is some of our conversation.

Thank you so much for for being here.

This story is getting lots o attention for obvious reasons.

Listen, I think we all get that we live in the age of AI.

Cameras are everywher on our phone, homes, doorbells, you name it.

The part that suck out to me was how quietly Rutgers handled this.

What's your sense of why?

It was a quiet $1.5 million purchase?

Well, first of all, thank yo so much for for having me today.

I was not able to get a really great sense of why the purchase was.

Then quietly, the answer that I got from Rutgers University was that this wa a simple upgrade of an ongoing, you know, surveillance system meant to keep students, faculty and staff and visitors safe.

And that beyond that, you know, there wasn't much to it, really.

So they they talked about just normal days, business, doing what we have to do.

But according to your report they're saying it is essentially a crime fighting a measure keep, you know, keep the campus safe.

Certainly people can can respect that.

But as you're reporting points out nationally right now, crime is down.

Crime specifically on college campuses is down.

Rutger isn't seeing some kind of spike.

So how are they reconciling this really powerful system with no increase in crime?

I think understandably so.

Campuses have been really worried about extremely violent attacks, specifically mass shootings like we saw at Brown University, like Michigan.

And this was at a time when particularly universities were being called out for not having enough of these cameras.

So I think part of it is to ensure that, you know, another horrific event like that doesn't happen.

But like you said, you know, the statistics show that these kinds of violen crimes are actually declining, at least holding steady on Rutgers campuses.

Interesting.

I remember that Brown University shooting, and I think even at the highest levels of government, there was criticism did have enough cameras to track the shooter.

What has been student reaction so far?

I, I saw a headline after your initial article, pretty much saying Rucker students are extremely upset and angry by this.

How what are they doing and what's what's the cause for their concern?

It's not just the students, it' also the staff and the faculty that you know we're not surprised.

But they were really, really concerned about the use of this technology and in particular the fact that, you know, i hadn't really been announced or it hadn't really been discussed with the universit Senate, the Board of governors.

When I spoke to Rutgers University, they said that, you know, because this was mone coming from the general budget.

They didn't really need an approval from the board of governors.

And that it was, you know, this is a pot of money that Rutgers can use for any, any purpose whatsoever.

But, students are really concerned about this.

They feel like this is very invasive.

A school administrator who has worked at the university for 20 years told me that she found them really creepy.

There were a couple of people who said, you know, listen, if this increases safety, then I'm all for it.

I don't see what the you know what the problem is necessarily.

But the majority of reactions that we had, you know, we're we're we're very concerned.

If the school is saying essentially this is about keeping our campus safe, which again, I think most people would say okay, I understand that we live, you know, things happen, ba things happen in this country.

We understand bad things happe on college campuses sometimes.

But I imagine that that that privacy activist and ACLU, that that that segment of the debate, they have issues with this as well, that they think this is intrusive.

Is anyone planning to to fight bac or they're just going to accept this as the new reality?

Rutgers I'm not entirely sure if anyone's, you know, deciding to fight against this.

I do know that the ACL and other experts that I spoke with were very concerned about this, and there's sort of, they're tying it to a broader expansion o surveillance across the country, not necessarily just a college campuses, but also, you know, on, on streets in, in parking lots.

And it seems like at least wha I heard from experts was that, you know, it's not just this one particular camera, this one particular provider or one particular, you know, location.

It's that this is just a overarching expanding surveillance apparatus that to them is really concerning and potentially unconstitutional.

And what I was reading in your article as well is that this system, whatever they just bought for the 1.5, can be connecte to existing cameras on campus.

So now they've built a vast network.

I can imagine there's very little on that campus that they can track whether it's a car or a person or what have you.

It and it seems to b a big creep because there was a I already Rutgers, as you mentioned, in terms of kind of like the modern punching clock, people check in and check out and work using, you know, facial recognition or AI.

But this is a big jump from that.

No, it's true.

The particular provider that we're talking about here is a company called a vigilant, which is owned by Motorola Solutions.

It's one of the biggest sort of leader in the automated license plate and sort of surveillance technology space.

And what's interesting about the software that Rutgers got this summe is that it can be connected to other existing cameras, so they're compatible with other providers.

That doesn't necessarily have to be individual and camera or a Motorola camera.

And it definitely.

This is especially what concerned the experts that I spoke with.

Like you said, you know, it's a it's a it's a creep.

It's sort of an expanding surveillance, a Paradise that can, you know, can be updated wit even more features down the line that, you know, we don't even know of yet.

It's amazing whether it's cameras on campu or the battle over data centers, which is really heating up in Jersey right now.

AI is you can just tell it's one of those issues where it's just so here and so omnipresent, but also comes back to a, I think, another issue we wrestle with in this countr a long time, particularly after nine over 11, is this battle betwee what price we're willing to pay for a sense of safety, an when is surveillance too much?

So there is a larger debat around this, a societal debate happening right now as well?

No, absolutely.

And I think we're goin to continue to have that debate as these capabilities expand.

And as we se more of them on street corners and parking lots on college campuses, another thing that one of the experts that I spoke with was really concerned about is increase of surveillance, particularly at universities, as a response to protest that we saw across the country in the last couple of years.

You know, and, it's it's just one of those things that we think of universities and university campuses as sort of the beacons of free speech and, and education and lively debate and the chilling, th what experts said was, you know, that this could have a chilling effect on, on that kind of a culture.

I think life is different if you're being watched, sometimes for better and worse.

It's a fascinating topic, and I'll be anxious to see the student and faculty reaction as we learn more about what this what this does.

But thank you for putting a huge spotlight on this.

Appreciate it.

Thanks so much.

And j.com investigative reporter Yana again.

Many thanks.

Time for tonight's roundabout headlines from all across our state.

And we begin with this tough news tonight, an investigation underway after a man from New York was killed following a shooting on the upper level of the George Washington Bridge.

Police say they responded to crash around 7:00 Tuesday night.

And that's where officers found the man in his car with a gunshot wound to the head.

He was taken to the hospital, where he later died.

That victim now being identifie as 46 year old Corrine Irvine.

No word yet on the shooter's identity or any arrest tonight, though there are reports as late afternoon that a man is in custody in connection with this deadly shooting.

The bridge was closed for about five hours while authorities conducted the investigation.

Also tonight, new Jersey.

Cracking down on Geico.

This after investigators found the insurer over charged drivers more than 10.5 million bucks.

The state Department of Bankin and Insurance says the problems impacte more than 15,000 policyholders, according to the new Jersey monitor.

Geico is accused of charging rates above approved limits, and some policies were eve canceled for improper reasons.

Geico now must pay over $1 million in fines on top of refunds to affected customers.

The company started issuing those refunds soon after the investigation began back in 2024, with the final fine issued yesterday.

Two health care system in the Garden State are moving closer to a merger.

Hackensack Meridian Health and Hunterdon Health have signed an agreement.

That deal includes more than $200 million in investments to Huntington.

Before it's finalized, the deal's deal still needs state and federal approval.

But until then, both systems will continue operating independently.

And of course, we al know Jersey is the best state, but tonight we're adding another title to our list.

The outset, according to a new study out this week by Manhattan Mental Health Counseling, the Garden State rank number one for every day noise.

The company used factor like traffic and public transit population density.

Yeah.

Got that.

And nightlife got that too.

The study analyzed 48 states, not Alaska.

Hawaii and Jersey topped the lis with a score of 75 out of 100.

And in case you're wonderin who the quietest state is, well, that would be our friends in Wyoming.

With early voting beginning this Saturday.

Two Republican led House committees today subpoenaed the Cheryl administration, demanding records on the software failure that improperly registered roughly 6600 noncitizens.

The move comes as local officials work to get voter ready for this election season.

The Camden County Clerk's office in South Jersey is hostin what they're calling an election services tour, which began in earnest just yesterday in Gloucester City.

It's basically voter education on wheels.

And NJ South Jersey reporter Scott Minshull was there.

This is th mobile election services setup that will be touring Camden County this week.

Anyone who lives in Camden County could come right here and get their ballot and everything they need to vote in this year's election.

All throughout this week, the Camden County Clerk's office is hitting the road to get people ready to vote.

There's a lot of energy.

There's a lot of excitement.

And we want to capitalize on the on the energy that's out there right now.

Camden County Clerk Pamela Lampard says the mobile voting services tours how they are capitalizing on that energy.

And, you know, with all of the confusion that happened way back in Augus and September of of our voters not knowing whether or not they would actually get their vote by mail.

This office went underway and really, truly prepared for the what ifs.

The Mobile Election Services tour will be at the Camden County Library, Voorhees branch on Friday from noon to 5 p.m.. Lambert says you can get a mail in ballot right there and be ready to vot in this year's general election.

We sent them out so early.

We hear from a lot of people that, you know what?

I put it someplace an I can't remember where I put it.

And, oh, you know, I'll get it.

Or or they're not sure how to get a replacement.

So we truly want to make it accessible for them.

Early voting starts on Saturday and will run all nine days leading up to the election.

If you have a mail in ballot and live in Camden County, you can drop it off right now in one of these 30 drop off boxes that are located all around Camden County.

Reporting in Gloucester City, Scott Mitchell, PBS new Jersey news.

Scott, thank you for that report.

Earlier this week, we heard from Democratic Congresswoman Ana Lilia mejia about her wor in Washington and her campaign for a full term.

Well, tonight, we're giving her Republican opponent the same opportunity.

Joe Hathaway, Randolph councilman and former mayor, is facing Mejia for the second time this year.

They're on a loop here.

Now, he did lose April's specia election by roughly 21 points, and now has just two weeks to convince voters to make a different choice this time around.

Just so you know, this district district, pardon me, covers much of Morris County, as well as parts of Essex and Passaic as well.

Joe Hathaway joining us now.

Preciate you being here.

Rob, thanks for having me.

So let's just get the political math out of the way first.

And then we're going to hit on all of Jersey's hot button issues here.

But listen, you guys have done this dance before you even the congresswoman 21 points.

Pretty convincing victory for her.

Is it possible to overcome that kin of gap to win this time around?

It would seem like long odds, but what gives you optimism?

Oh, well, look, you know, Rob, first of all, I mean, when you have a special election on a random Thursday in April where more people are worried about, you know, Mets and Yankees on Opening Da than thinking about an election, you know, you you see you see really odd swings, right?

We had and the truth is on both sides of the aisle we saw very low turnout, about 23%.

You know, I'm sure we both wish we saw more turnout in a specia but come to a November election.

We are going to see double maybe even triple that turnout.

And there's going to be a lot of folks in somewhere in the middl who are going to have to decide what do they wan representing them in Washington.

Do they want more ideological extremism, or do they want the practical local leader who has gotten things done here in new Jersey, representing them now in Washington?

And I think over the las few months of having Miss Mejia representing us in Washington, seeing a lack of results and seeing a push towards ideological extremism, I think voters are going to make a change.

Let's go through a little bit of the hot button issues here in Jersey.

Let's start with data centers.

On one hand there are a lot of environmental and someone or you moral issues about the emergence of AI.

And some also see the economi development part of it as well.

Where do you come down?

We have more than 100 towns in Jersey that have said, stay out of here and put bands in place.

What's your take on that?

Well, you know, look, it's funny, I think AI is one of those.

It wasn't even as big an issue in the special.

This is truly an emerging technology that we are seeing grow and take steam.

And and this is where government has to do its job.

This is the hard job of governing.

When you have an unknown technology that no one's really an expert on.

How do you ensure that guardrails are in place to make sure that bad actors can't use it for nefarious reasons, or it's not hurting the community?

But how do you also make sure that America leads o what is going to be the future of technology?

Right?

Do you support regulation?

I listen, I support.

I support regulation to make.

Absolutely.

When you have an untested new technology like this, we need strong guardrails.

We also need to make sur that we're using this innovation to advance American interests and not falling behind China and Russia and our adversaries.

But, you know, that's why this is the hard job of governing.

And when you have leaders like Miss Mejia, who has simply punted on the issue and called for a global moratorium, I don't know what a globa moratorium on AI actually means.

Are we going to are we going to politely as China not to use AI technology?

You know, that's that's no the kind of leadership we need.

This is where you have to roll up your sleeves and really get to work.

And I think there's middle ground here where we can make sure people are protected and make sure that this technology is going to benefit Americans in the long run.

So walk in that line, some regulation.

But also you still se the economic development issue in keeping pace with competitors like China.

So unquestionably, unquestionably.

Immigration enforcement.

Your opponents talked a lot about that.

She was here on the show in light of what she released about the Roxbury facility.

I know tha facility is not in the district, but what is your general take?

Because immigration certainly has been a lot nationally in here in Jersey, some incidents.

Do you think Ice has gone too far?

What regulations, if any do you think they should need in light of what we've seen?

Well I think actually I was opposed to the Roxbury facility before even Miss Mejia was probably for different reasons.

They are a neighboring town to us in Randolph.

And look, whe you have a facility like that, you need an infrastructure in a municipality that can function with that.

And I know Roxbury very well.

I know it's not equipped for that, but but look, I think everyone in this in this district, most people in this countr believe that if people are here illegally committin violent crime, most importantly, they should go.

They should be removed from this country.

We need safe communities, especially our minority communities need to be safer.

So listen, I think Ic is a very difficult job to do.

I think we need to ensure that they are doing it in a better fashion, that they have more training, better technology, better tools at their disposal to keep themselves safe, to keep the public safe and t and to do the job effectively.

And last thing for to let you go, you obviously well known politics that the litmus test for Republicans these days is is the loyalty to Trump or not.

How are you Let's just call it what it is.

Name one thing that you disagree most strongly with that President Trump has done or said, if you do it on any issue.

Well, Rob I can name much more than one.

But let me start just by.

The biggest.

Yeah, I think the job of representatives, especially at the end of the day, is to put their district first, ahead of their party, ahead of their president, if they're of the same party.

That should be the job we get back to.

And for me, one of the first ones I called the president out on was the Gateway Tunnel project that he is now multiple times played politics with.

That is too many jobs for our district.

It's too many commuters that need to get to and from New York City.

We should stop playing politics with important infrastructure, and we should get to work and do what's righ by the people of our district.

But we need to hold both sides of this line accountable.

We need to hold accountable for the radical positions of the far left of the DSA, who want to abolish the Senate and eliminate our borders and dismantle our courts.

We both should be the one pushing back against extremism wherever we see it.

That's what voters wil get with me come November 3rd.

All right, Joe Hathaway, appreciate you being here as you give us some time.

Good luck out there on the campaign trail and invitation to come back and talk about more ideas.

We'll see what November may, may bring.

We'll have to be back after November.

As Congressman Electron.

We will see up to the voters.

Thank you very much.

We do appreciate your time.

Thank you again.

Joe Hathaway, Republican challenging 11th District Congresswoman Anna mejia.

We thank them again for being here with us on NJ PBS news.

And that's going to do it for us tonight.

Thank you so much for joining us here at NJ PBS news.

Have a good night.

Jersey.