This article originally appeared on TheHumanist.com.
By Ron Millar
This is part of The Humanist’s recurring series highlighting openly nonreligious elected officials across the nation. Because of the work of the Center for Freethought Equality, the political and advocacy arm of the American Humanist Association, there are over 120 elected officials at the local, state, and federal level who publicly identify with the atheist and humanist community serving in 35 states across the country. Join the Center for Freethought Equality to help politically empower the atheist and humanist community—membership is FREE!
The Center for Freethought Equality’s advances have been groundbreaking. Prior to the 2016 election, there were only five state legislators and no members of Congress who publicly identified with our community; because of its efforts, today we have seventy-seven state legislators and three members of Congress – Yassamin Ansari (AZ-3), Jared Huffman (CA-2), and Emily Randall (WA-6) – who publicly identify with our community. It is critical that our community connect and engage with the elected officials who represent our community and our values—you can see a list of these elected officials here.
New Jersey State Senator Andrew Zwicker
Representing Central New Jersey in District 16
“By being open about my nonreligious identity, I hope to normalize the idea that ethical leadership can come from diverse sources, whether religious or secular. I want my constituents to know that my decisions are based on reason, evidence, and a commitment to the common good.”
Andrew Zwicker is the far-too rare scientist-legislator. He is a physicist and Head of Public Engagement & Workforce Development at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory and is a member of the New Jersey State Senate. His victory in 2015 for the New Jersey General Assembly was a big upset in New Jersey politics, when he defeated a Republican incumbent by less than 100 votes. As a scientist, Senator Zwicker promotes public policy using evidence-based decision making, not ideology, and is focused on investing in education, advancing scientific research and development, combating climate change, and strengthening democracy. Dr. Zwicker is an atheist.
What motivated you to run for office?
Growing up, my mother was deeply involved in local politics. One defining moment came during a teacher strike in Englewood, where I was raised. As a member of several unions, she refused to cross the picket line and instead organized a homeschool for students while the strike continued. At the time, I didn’t realize it, but that experience sparked my political awareness.
Decades later, while working in fusion energy, I found myself at another turning point. Congressman Rush Holt—who first hired me at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, where I still work—announced his retirement. My colleagues, regardless of political affiliation, encouraged me to run for office. They told me that, above all, they wanted to be represented by a scientist—someone committed to facts and problem-solving.
In 2014, as a complete political outsider, I decided to jump into the congressional primary. I often joke that my campaign had more PhDs on staff than any in history. While I ultimately finished with 8% of the vote—better than many expected—the experience set me on a new path. Soon after, I was asked to run for the State Assembly in Legislative District 16, and I became the first Democrat ever to represent the district. Today, the entire district is represented by Democrats.
I believe my background in science intrigues people and encourages more curiosity and openness in political conversations. My decision to enter public service was driven by a belief in the power of science, education, and evidence-based policy to improve lives. As a physicist and educator, I have spent my career focused on critical thinking and problem-solving—an approach I now bring to the legislature to ensure policies are based on facts and serve the best interests of our communities.
What are your policy priorities and how does your nonreligious worldview impact your policy platform?
My policy priorities focus on investing in education, advancing scientific research and development, combating climate change, and strengthening democracy. My nonreligious worldview aligns with my commitment to rational, evidence-based policymaking. I believe in crafting policies that serve all constituents fairly, regardless of their beliefs, and I strive to uphold the principles of equality, reason, and social progress in my legislative work.
The scientific method requires us to challenge assumptions, measure outcomes, and refine our approach based on real evidence—yet too often, politics lacks this level of discipline. Many policy decisions are driven by short-term political considerations rather than long-term impact, undermining the effectiveness of governance.
That said, while data and reason are central to my decision-making, my time in public service has given me a deep appreciation for the role of faith in people’s lives. As a senator, I have visited more synagogues, temples, mosques, gurdwaras, and churches than I ever imagined. While my approach to policy making remains secular, my respect for the power of religion to unite communities has only grown stronger. My nonreligious perspective allows me to appreciate that beauty from a different yet similar framework—one rooted in shared values of empathy, respect, and the importance of lived experience in shaping our collective future.
Why was it important for you to be open about your nonreligious identity?
It is important for me to demonstrate that one does not need to be religious to have strong ethics, integrity, and a sense of moral responsibility. While many believe that morality and compassion are rooted in faith, I believe these values are universal and can be cultivated through reason, empathy, and human connection. While the central tenet of most religions teaches morality and ethics, a belief in god is not a requirement for an ethical life.
By being open about my nonreligious identity, I hope to normalize the idea that ethical leadership can come from diverse sources, whether religious or secular. I want my constituents to know that my decisions are based on reason, evidence, and a commitment to the common good.
How did voters respond (if at all) to your openness about your nonreligious identity?
In my experience, most voters are far more concerned with results than religious labels. I’ve found that whether someone is Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Christian, or holds no religious belief at all, we’re all looking for the same thing in our elected officials: empathy, integrity, and a deep commitment to helping others. Those values—caring for the sick, supporting our neighbors, making sure everyone feels seen and included—aren’t just progressive values; they’re universal ones. They form the moral core of many faiths, and they’re also the foundation of my politics.
While I don’t come to those values through personal faith, I hold them just as strongly. My nonreligious worldview has never been a barrier—in fact, it’s helped me build bridges across religions. When you cut through it all, voters want a good human being representing them. That’s what I strive to be.
To learn more about Senator Andrew Zwicker:
