AIPAC is a challenge for Democrats in midterm races

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee has become a wedge issue in Democratic midterm primaries, with progressive candidates, even beyond the far-left flank, seeing it as a point of pride to refuse to accept support from the pro-Israel group.

“For the first time, people are saying openly that being pro-Israel doesn’t necessarily mean support for the government of Israel,” Lauren Strauss, professor of modern Jewish history at American University in Washington, told JNS.

“What AIPAC has always stood for is that they support whoever is the current government of the State of Israel,” said Strauss, who directs the university’s undergraduate Jewish studies program. “That has become increasingly problematic for many American Jews and for many candidates running for office.”

What has clearly happened is increased hostility to Israel, and saying you’re against AIPAC is saying that,” said Morton Klein, national president of the Zionist Organization of America.

As a one-issue organization, AIPAC has always been resolutely bipartisan, which is increasingly challenging in these politically divided times.

AIPAC did not respond to a JNS request for comment.

Hadar Susskind, president and CEO of the progressive group New Jewish Narrative, which states that “peace and justice are the birthright of Israelis, of Palestinians and of all people,” told said that AIPAC “is absolutely a giant and arguably the number one issue in midterms across the country.”

“For people I talk to from everywhere, regardless of their political affiliation and personal background and district, AIPAC is a major issue in a way that is very different than it’s ever been before,” Susskind said.

In a campaign video in late February, the former NYC comptroller says, “I’m Brad Lander, a lifelong progressive, and I’m running for Congress.”

“A lifelong progressive?” says Mayor Zohran Mamdani in the commercial. “You mean you haven’t sold out to special interests?”

“Or AIPAC either,” Lander says, with a shrug, as the two walk through a subway station.

“That’s impressive,” Mamdani says, shaking his head.

Lander is running against incumbent Rep. Dan in a hotly contested race in New York’s 10th District, which represents lower Manhattan and western edges of Brooklyn.

Goldman, who identifies as progressive, is seen as the more moderate candidate of the two and has extensive government experience, including as lead counsel in the first impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.

But in a district that voted heavily for Democratic Socialist Mamdani, Goldman’s stances on Israel may prove to be a liability in the primary on June 23.

AIPAC is pouring tens of millions of dollars into fighting candidates it considers insufficiently pro-Israel, often doing so through PACs with innocuous names, in a shift over the past election cycle into tactics that are often referred to as “dark money.”

The issue of limiting US military aid to Israel is turning out to be the sledgehammer driving the wedge deeper.

In the recent special primary to fill the vacant congressional seat in New Jersey’s 11th District, former congressman Tom Malinowski lost by 1.7 percentage points to Analilia Mejia, who has accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza.

Malinowski, a Democrat who long supported Israel, apparently raised AIPAC’s ire when he said that he “would not deny anything Israel needs to defend itself” but left open the possibility of placing limits on aid.

In response, the United Democracy Project, an AIPAC Super PAC, spent at least $2.3 million to oppose Malinowski in ads sponsored by one group called “Elect Women,” for instance.

None of the ads mentioned Israel.

The Super PAC began 2026 with $96 million in its coffers, nearly triple the $35 million it reportedly spent in the 2024 primaries.

In Illinois’ primary races on March 17, those who lost were candidates whom AIPAC targeted. AIPAC’s “Elect Illinois Women” and other Super PACs funded by the Israel advocacy group were active in the race.

In a campaign email sent out the next day, Lander wrote, of the Illinois races, “though AIPAC spent over $20 million, they never even talked about Israel. We’re next.”

“My opponent accepts crypto and AIPAC support and winks at millions of dollars of outside spending on his behalf,” the former city comptroller said. “We don’t.”

Running ads behind shadow organizations is adding to Democratic sour feelings about AIPAC, according to Susskind, who leads the progressive group.

“People across the Democratic party are feeling that they have become the primary example of some of the abuses of dark money in politics,” he told JNS, of AIPAC.

AIPAC is “fighting a losing rear guard battle within Democratic politics,” Susskind said. “Both the constituency and the elected officials are not with them.”

Strauss, of American University, said that the moment “is an existential issue for AIPAC as an organization.”