







Candidate standings
Live market pricing for the leading candidates in this election.
Current roleU.S. Army Reserve officer
PartyDemocratic
Political ideologyModerate Democrat
GenderMale
LocationNew Jersey
BackgroundU.S. Army Reserve officer
EducationPrinceton University (undergraduate; ROTC)
Notable personal detailsZachary (Zach) Beecher is a Democratic candidate for U.S. House in New Jersey’s 11th Congressional District and a U.S. Army Reserve officer. He is a Princeton University graduate and served on active duty with the 82nd Airborne Division, deploying to Iraq in support of Operation Inherent Resolve. After active duty, he worked in venture capital focused on national security and emerging technology and later rejoined the Army Reserve, serving with the U.S. Special Operations Command’s Army Reserve Element.
Zach Beecher’s campaign emphasizes lowering costs for New Jersey families and criticizes tariffs as a tax on the middle class, but it does not present a clear, detailed stance on federal tax rates, tax increases on high incomes or corporate taxation. Public materials focus on reducing costs (health care, energy, housing, childcare) and opposing tariffs rather than specifying whether he supports raising or cutting specific taxes. Available campaign and news sources do not provide a comprehensive tax-rate or tax-reform plan for classification under the rubric.
Supports lowering healthcare costs for New Jersey families but does not provide clear, detailed policy commitments on universality, a public option, Medicare for All, or specific market-based reforms.
Supports protections for immigrant and refugee communities and calls for policy reform of immigration enforcement; criticizes aggressive tactics by ICE and highlights concerns about ICE funding. Positions favor immigration reform with a humanitarian frame while accepting targeted enforcement discussion rather than advocating abolition as his primary policy demand.
The candidate emphasizes lowering energy costs for New Jersey families and highlights innovation and economic development in energy-related industries, but provides no clear policy commitments on emissions targets, phasing out fossil fuels, or specific climate legislation. Public materials reference affordability and innovation rather than detailed climate or clean-energy policy. Overall, positions on climate mitigation versus support for fossil-fuel development are not specified clearly enough to classify as progressive or conservative.






Aggregation source: FiftyPlusOne
2026
LatestCycle 2026
Source: FEC
New updates coming soon
We're monitoring and will update when new data impacts the race.