[Guardian analysis finds top recipients of pro-Israel
contributions in last elections were centrist Democrats who defeated
progressives in primaries ]
[[link removed]]

REVEALED: CONGRESS BACKERS OF GAZA WAR RECEIVED MOST FROM PRO-ISRAEL
DONORS  
[[link removed]]


 

Tom Perkins, with data reporting by Will Craft
January 10, 2024
The Guardian
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Guardian analysis finds top recipients of pro-Israel contributions
in last elections were centrist Democrats who defeated progressives in
primaries _

A Palestinian medic takes a baby pulled out of buildings destroyed in
the Israeli bombardment of the Gaza Strip in Rafah, on October 22,
2023., [Hatem Ali/AP Photo]

 

Congress members who were more supportive of Israel at the start of
the Gaza war received over $100,000 more on average from pro-Israel
donors during their last election than those who most supported
Palestine, a Guardian analysis of campaign data shows.

Those who took more money most often called for US military support
and backed Israel’s response, even as Gaza’s civilian death toll
mounted, the findings show. The analysis, which looks at positions
taken during the war’s first six weeks, does not prove any
particular member changed their position because they received
pro-Israel campaign donations. However, some campaign finance experts
who viewed the data argue that donor spending helped fuel Congress’s
overwhelming support for Israel.

The analysis compared campaign contributions from pro-Israel groups
and individuals to almost every member of the current Congress with
each lawmaker’s statements on the war through mid-November.

About 82% of Congress members were more supportive of Israel, and just
9% more supportive of Palestine during this period. The remainder had
“mixed” views. Legislators categorized as supportive of Israel
received about $125,000 on average during their last election, while
those supportive of Palestine on average took about $18,000.

The volume and breadth of the donors’ spending is considerable: over
$58m went to current Congress members, and all but 33 received
donations.

The findings have “profound implications for what American policy
toward … Israel looks like”, said John Mearsheimer, a University
of Chicago political scientist and co-author of the 2006 book The
Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy. “If there was no lobby pushing
Congress in a particular direction in a really forceful way, the
position of the US Congress
[[link removed]] on the war in Gaza
would be fundamentally different.”

The groups’ campaign contributions have varying goals depending on
the member. Spending can be “defensive” or “shore up support”
in Congress for allies who already share pro-Israel groups’ views,
said Sarah Bryner, a spokesperson for Open Secrets, which tracks
campaign finance spending and collected the contributions data used in
the Guardian’s analysis. Spending can also be “offensive”, or
intended to persuade a lawmaker to take a pro-Israel position,
campaign finance observers and political strategists who reviewed the
data said.

The donors’ highest profile battles
[[link removed]] have
involved members of the “The Squad
[[link removed]]”, like
Representatives Ilhan Omar
[[link removed]] and Rashida
Tlaib
[[link removed]],
who are among the most critical of Israel. But statements from
Representatives Don Bacon, Dan Kildee and André Carson in the wake of
the 7 October attack in which 1,200 Israelis were killed help
illustrate varying levels of donations and responses across Congress.

All three first strongly condemned the assault’s perpetrators and
expressed deep sympathy for the victims, but their messaging quickly
diverged.

Bacon, who received about $250,000, offered full-throated support
[[link removed]] for
Israel: “Whatever Israel wants … we should be there to help.”

Carson, who received $3,000, took aim at Israel, denouncing
[[link removed]] its
“unfair, two-tiered rule over the Palestinian people” and demanded
a ceasefire.

Kildee, who received $91,000, fell somewhere in between, underscoring
[[link removed]] “Israel’s
security and its right to respond” and his ”grave concern” over
its airstrikes killing thousands of Palestinian civilians.

Included in the analysis are 33 pro-Israel groups and a number of
individuals that work to shore up US political support, secure
military assistance and steer national dialogue. Its prominent
campaign finance players include the American-Israel Public Affairs
Committee (Aipac), Democratic Majority For Israel (DMFI), and J
Street.

The donors are not ideologically monolithic. J Street, which calls
itself “pro-Israel and pro-peace” and is considered among the most
liberal Pacs, only gave to Democrats, and in some cases backed
progressive candidates targeted by more conservative Pacs, like Aipac
or DMFI. While donors across the spectrum have pressured lawmakers
[[link removed]] to
support Israel following 7 October, J Street has been among the only
group to raise
[[link removed]] concern
about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and express support
[[link removed]] for
conditioning aid to Israel.

The groups are a powerful force in US politics
[[link removed]] that draw
comparisons to the National Rifle Association (NRA) at the peak of its
power, and spent more on the 2022 Congress than other special
interests, such as the oil and gas industry.

The former president Barack Obama, in his 2020 memoir, detailed the
threat Aipac presents to Israel’s critics, who risked “being
tagged as ‘anti-Israel’ (and possibly anti-Semitic) and confronted
with a well-funded opponent in the next election”, he wrote.

In a statement to the Guardian, an Aipac spokesperson, Marshall
Wittmann, said the group is “proud of our engagement in the
democratic process – as is our right as Americans – to advance the
relationship between the US and Israel”.

The donors’ success rate is often high: DMFI-backed candidates won
over 80% of their 2022 races, the group says
[[link removed].].
Pacs such as DMFI and Aipac’s United Democracy Project, which was
launched during the 2022 cycle, have focused attacks on progressive
candidates.

The top six recipients of pro-Israel donor support in 2022 were
centrist Democrats
[[link removed]] who defeated
progressives in primaries and collectively accounted for around $25m,
or about 42% of the donors’ spending.

WHAT WE FOUND

To determine whether lawmakers were supportive of Israel, Palestine or
had a mixed response, the Guardian examined officials’ media
statements, X accounts and letters to Joe Biden from 7 October through
mid-November.

The unprecedented moment in US-Israeli relations has helped lay bare
the extent of Congress’s support for Israel.

The analysis of Congress members’ responses in this period found:

*
93% called for US military or financial support for Israel.

*
81% supported Israel’s response.

*
17% criticized Israel or called for a ceasefire.

*
17% contextualized the war, meaning they raised issues like Israeli
settlement expansion or human rights violations in Gaza that preceded
the 7 October attack.

Some legislators’ positions have shifted as a humanitarian crisis
deepened and Israeli attacks caused mass civilian casualties.
Following Israel’s deadly strike on the Jabalia refugee camp
[[link removed]],
for example Senator Dick Durbin and Representative Maxine Waters
[[link removed]],
who had previously shown stronger support for Israel, called for a
ceasefire.

Congress has been much more sympathetic to Israeli civilian victims
than Palestinian, but party affiliation, not money, predicted
lawmakers’ statements on civilian casualties.

The spending patterns detailed in the analysis help explain why war
exploded in Gaza, said Stephen Walt, a Harvard University
international affairs professor who co-authored the book with
Mearsheimer. Over recent decades, Israel likely would have been unable
to carry out many of its inflammatory policies, like settlement
expansion, without a “pro-Israel lobby” to help secure US arms and
political support, he said.

Ideas such as US sanctions, withholding military aid or the US
sponsoring a critical United Nations Security Council resolution are
“complete science fiction” in large part because of the groups’
influence, Walt added.

Many of the pro-Israel groups have opposed Palestinian statehood, and
played a significant role in derailing peace processes, Mearsheimer
said.

“If the lobby had worked with any administrations to allow
presidents to pressure Israel to produce an agreement that led to a
Palestinian state, then we probably would not be in this disastrous
situation,” he said.

Some groups mobilized against representatives who supported
Palestinian statehood. In 2022, Aipac
[[link removed]] supported
the ouster of the former representative Andy Levin, a Jewish
progressive and self-described Zionist, in part over his proposed
bill calling for a two-state solution and “an end to Israel’s
occupation of the Palestinian territories”.

Ahead of Levin’s primary, Aipac’s former president sent out
[[link removed]] a
fundraising pitch calling Levin’s race against centrist
Representative Haley Stevens a “rare opportunity to defeat arguably
the most corrosive member of Congress to the US-Israel
relationship”.

The race turned into a battle between conservative and liberal donor
groups: donors poured nearly $5.4m into backing Stevens. She easily
beat Levin, who was backed with about $700,000 in J Street support.
The Guardian analysis found Stevens to be among the staunchest
supporters of Israel’s response – she was one of just 12
Democrats
[[link removed]] who
broke with the party to vote for a GOP Israel assistance bill that did
not include humanitarian aid for Gaza.

Congress members who were more supportive of Palestinian causes or
more neutral prior to being elected, like Senator John Fetterman,
Representative Maxwell Frost
[[link removed]] and
Senator Raphael Warnock
[[link removed]],
shifted to take more pro-Israel positions after pro-Israel groups made
donations, or threatened to get involved in a race. The Guardian found
Fetterman and Warnock to be more supportive of Israel following the 7
October attacks, while Frost had a mixed response and has signed onto
a resolution calling for a ceasefire.

The DMFI president, Mark Mellman, said the analysis does not prove
that pro-Israel donor contributions influenced Congress’s position
or caused any lawmaker to change their views on Israel. Anyone who
posits that is “an advocate, not an analyst”, he said.

“I’m in favor of changing how it works, but it works that way for
every issue, for every progressive issue, for every conservative
issue, so there is absolutely nothing unique about pro-Israel
community in this respect,” he said. “Not acknowledging that would
be antisemitic.”

Campaign finance experts noted that some congressional donations are
given to members because they already share a position, raising a
“chicken or egg” question about the role of the money in
members’ views. Bacon, a former Air Force colonel, said Israel has
strategic value to the US and noted he is an evangelical with a
“spiritual connection” to Israel.

Dozens of evangelicals serve in Congress, and Bacon said the question
of supporting Israel “is a matter of the heart” for many people
like him.

“My support comes from the time I was five years old and my dad said
‘Those who bless Israel will be blessed’ which is right out of the
Old Testament,” Bacon told the Guardian.

AT ODDS WITH THE PUBLIC

The analysis also highlights how most of Congress is in line with
conservative pro-Israel positions – but not with those of the US
public. While the Guardian found just 17% of Congress was critical of
Israel or called for a ceasefire in the first six weeks of the war, US
polls show
[[link removed].] up
to 68% of Americans support a ceasefire
[[link removed]],
and around 80% of Democrats.

“There is no question” pro-Israel donor contributions spread
across Congress drive the disparity, said James Zogby, a pollster and
founder of the Arab American Institute. But he believes this is not a
matter of more robust public debate because “if you raise the issue
of money then you run the risk of being called an antisemite,” he
added.

The Guardian identified 132 legislators who received less than $10,000
in backing, including 33 who received $0, but are still supportive of
Israel. While that includes some Republicans who are ideologically
aligned with groups like Aipac, some experts who reviewed the data
believe it points to the donors’ strength.

Their vast spending instills fear across Congress, and Aipac is the
“elephant in the room” in Democratic campaigns, said Waleed
Shahid, a progressive strategist who said consultants have advised
candidates to publicly take pro-Israel positions to placate pro-Israel
donors.

“There aren’t that many lobbies that are willing to spend millions
of dollars to unseat you in a primary,” Shahid added.

Moreover, most lawmakers represent districts with very few Jewish or
Arab American constituents to pressure them on votes, and there is
virtually no pro-Palestine lobby to counterweight, Mearsheimer noted.
That makes it easier and safer for lawmakers to take pro-Israel
positions, he added.

The 2022 primary in North Carolina’s first congressional district
encapsulated those issues. Relatively few Jews or Arab Americans live
in the area, and the Democratic representative Don Davis, armed with
about $2.8m in donor support, defeated a more progressive candidate
before winning in the general election.

Davis, fresh off a junket trip to Israel funded by Aipac in August,
was one of 10 Democrats who in November broke with the party to vote
to censure Tlaib and support the GOP Israel funding bill that did not
include humanitarian aid for Palestinians.

Other Congress members have shifted positions or “been silenced on
Palestine only because they were afraid of the wrath of Aipac,” said
Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for Justice Democrats, which backs
progressive candidates.

Democrats on average received more money than Republicans. Those who
the Guardian found were supportive of Israel on average received about
$243,000 compared with $52,000 for their GOP counterparts.

The next election promises more of the same. A pro-Israel donor has
allegedly already offered $20m in backing for someone to run against
Tlaib, the nation’s only Palestinian American lawmaker.
Representative Jamaal Bowman, who is backed by J Street, faces
[[link removed]] a
challenger who will likely receive support from more conservative
pro-Israel groups.

Meanwhile, Representative Summer Lee, who, with around $38,000 in J
Street support, defeated a candidate backed with millions in funding
from more conservative pro-Israel groups, is again facing a challenge
from a more pro-Israel candidate.

Perhaps the most vocal critic of Aipac has been Representative Mark
Pocan, who received $5,500 in pro-Israel funding, and in
November said
[[link removed]] he
did not “give a fuck about Aipac”, labelling it a “cancer” in
US politics.

The group took GOP dark money and spent it in Democratic primaries,
often at levels exceeding candidate spending, and across a high number
of races, Pocan said. As the strategy pays dividends on the war, he
fears it will be copied by other powerful lobbies, which he said could
be a “deathblow to democracy”.

“If outside groups – especially in primaries where so much less
money is spent – decide to purchase elections and make them
auctions, that really will change the character of Congress in a very
negative way,” Pocan said.

* Israel-Gaza War
[[link removed]]
* Lobbying
[[link removed]]
* US Congress
[[link removed]]
* Pro-Israel Donors
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]