Politics1 min read

Aipac and the Michigan Senate race: How the Israel lobby became toxic

By · Via Middle East Eye · Published by Everything Blog

In short

Historically, the lobby avoided direct campaign endorsements, relying instead on congressional report cards, legislative lobbying, and sponsored educational trips to maintain influence. That changed when it created two committees, including the United for Democracy Project super PAC, to spend directly on political contests. This public electoral spending drew fierce criticism from figures like Bernie Sanders and eventually led to the recent closure of one of its newly created PACs.

Key points

  • Direct electoral spending transformed the lobby into a prominent target for critics oppos…: Direct electoral spending transformed the lobby into a prominent target for critics opposing big money in American elections.
  • The group historically relied on congressional report cards and trips to Israel rather th…: The group historically relied on congressional report cards and trips to Israel rather than funding campaigns directly.
  • Publicly financing candidates has complicated the bipartisan influence the organization c…: Publicly financing candidates has complicated the bipartisan influence the organization carefully cultivated over several decades.

Sources checked by our analysis pipeline: 1

“A lobby is like a night flower: it thrives in the dark and dies in the sun.” So said Steve Rosen, former foreign policy director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) in a memo to a fellow staffer. Rosen would later be fired amid a major scandal involving espionage in passing classified US information to Israel.

Rosen was correct about the danger to a lobbying organisation that publicity poses. But in December 2021, Aipac decided to test that theory by creating two political action committees (Pacs) that enabled it to take part directly in political campaigns.

The results were mixed, and Aipac recently announced that it was closing one of the Pacs it had set up.

Aipac had been an advocacy organisation, promoting Israel’s interests, but it did not fund campaigns directly, nor did it endorse or fund political candidates.

In many ways, that made it more effective. It could do things like issue a congressional report card which rated every member of Congress’s support of Israel. Then other groups that were actual Pacs could use those reports…

Politics