The American Israel Public Affairs Committee reigns supreme after adding an additional 17 Democratic primary victories as it remains undefeated so far in this election cycle. All the while, progressives smear the NGO as “right-wing.”
AIPAC celebrated its dominance over American politics after its primary victories, sharing in a post on X, “Being pro-Israel is good policy and good politics.” The NGO has now secured nearly 200 members of special interest caucuses, including the Equality Caucus, the Asian-Pacific American Caucus, the Progressive Caucus, the Black Caucus and the Hispanic Caucus.
According to Politico, AIPAC plans to spend a whopping $100 million targeting candidates who have been openly critical of Israel and its actions against the Palestinian people post-Oct. 7.
Democratic California state Sen. Dave Min has felt the fire and fury of the Israel lobby with a range of ads focusing on his DUI arrest last year. Min had called for a permanent cease-fire in Gaza and has been critical of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He referred to AIPAC’s aggressions as being “swamped” by outside spending. Min, however, won his primary and will face off with Republican Scott Baugh. Still, he worries about AIPAC “wiping” progressives out.
A Democratic donor adviser sounded off similarly, telling Politico, “They’ll have so much money, wherever there’s an opportunity, they will take it.” Politico refrained from mentioning the person’s identity as it is almost viewed as uncouth to take a stance against Israel or criticize the actions of Israel’s foreign lobbyists.
In fact, in 2023, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., an outspoken Palestinian-American, was censured by Congress for comments about Israel. She said:
It is important to separate people and government. The idea that criticizing the government of Israel is antisemitic sets a very dangerous precedent. And it’s been used to silence diverse voices speaking up for human rights across our nation.
Leveraging accusations of antisemitism has been vital to AIPAC’s footing, but progressives have hit back, falsely linking the lobby to Republicans and racism. Albeit, most Republicans in office are pro-Israel, but AIPAC campaigns for both parties.
The Israel lobby is the top fundraiser for Democrats, including the Black Caucus, Hispanic Caucus and Asian-Pacific American Caucus. Still, that doesn’t deter progressives from utilizing the NGO’s image to champion their campaigns. To them, the October 7 attack against Israel is seen as the mobilization of Republican donors, which isn’t true based on the enormous hustle for pro-Israel Democrats backed by AIPAC. Even with this information, this does not deter progressives from a good campaign narrative.
Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., said in a statement, “AIPAC and their Republican mega-donors are targeting black and brown Democratic incumbents with the same right-wing playbook across the country.”
Usamah Andrabi, communications director for Justice Democrats, said much the same:
A handful of Republican billionaire mega-donors are using AIPAC to spend in Democratic primaries against black and brown progressives, funding primary campaigns against the most popular and progressive members, so this should be a scandal.
Jeremy Ben-Ami, president of the progressive pro-Israel group J Street, also regards AIPAC as being the “arm of the Republican Party.” He told Politico:
[AIPAC] is doing the dirty work of the [Republican National Committee] when it drives a wedge in the Democratic Party. The strategy is to ensure that the mainstream of the Democratic Party understands exactly how extreme and toxic AIPAC has become.
Meanwhile, AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittmann countered such claims, saying that support for candidates is purely based on “their commitment to strengthen the US-Israel relationship.”
We support scores of progressive candidates including the Democratic leadership and nearly half of the membership of the congressional Progressive Caucus, Black Caucus and Hispanic Caucus. In fact, we are the largest PAC contributor to Democratic candidates.
The reality here is that AIPAC is a threat to the ideological progressives. Their accusations of racism or backing Republican causes are, by evidence, unfounded. This could possibly provide an avenue to oust some progressives as their intel is not valid, and AIPAC has almost insurmountable funding. This is evidenced in New York with Rep. Jamal Bowman’s defeat but countered by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s unabashed victory. Still, without a doubt, the survival of the progressives is challenged by AIPAC and the unfathomed depth of the NGO’s pockets.
