JUNE 18, 2025 (Prospect.org)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
![\"Drop](\"https:\/\/prospect.org\/downloads\/23084\/download\/Drop%20Site%20News%20061825.jpg?cb=19aaa766c19489fc1ccaaa74d4fab4af\")
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
BRYAN OLIN DOZIER\/NURPHOTO VIA AP<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Israeli flags are carried during a rally near the U.S. Capitol on July 19, 2023, to welcome Israeli President Isaac Herzog to Washington.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This is a collaboration with Drop Site News<\/a>, an independent news site about politics and war.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has been furiously urging House Democrats to release messages of steadfast support for Israel in its war with Iran, the Prospect <\/em>and Drop Site News have learned, even as bipartisan lawmakers come together on a War Powers Act resolution to prevent U.S. troops or funds being used in yet another Middle East conflagration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One member relayed that a colleague had received literally 100 phone calls from members of AIPAC and its allied pressure groups. AIPAC wants House Democratic members to state explicitly that they \u201cstand with Israel\u201d in its actions against Iran aimed at destroying the Islamic Republic\u2019s nuclear capability, and add that Iran \u201cmust never have a nuclear weapon.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In addition, AIPAC has taken particular pains to denigrate the moderate pro-Israel group J Street, both in private conversations with members of Congress and in public, picking a fight aimed at blocking any Democrats from using J Street as cover to deviate from AIPAC\u2019s maximalist position. \u201cThey\u2019re worried their members in Congress may start to shift toward J Street and they\u2019re trying to head that off,\u201d said an aide to one Democrat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI did see that AIPAC took issue with my statement<\/a>,\u201d said Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington state. \u201cThey were taking on J Street for endorsing me, which was ridiculous.\u201d To get a sense of how extreme AIPAC\u2019s demands are, note that J Street\u2019s own statement<\/a> merely calls for diplomacy while still supporting Israel. \u201cWe urge the Trump Administration to meaningfully pursue a diplomatic resolution to this conflict as quickly as possible while making clear the US will do what is necessary to defend Israel and US troops from retaliation,\u201d the statement read.<\/p>\n\n\n\n AIPAC\u2019s urgency may be due to a somewhat surprising amount of dissent among some congressional Democrats against Israel\u2019s coordinated attacks on Iran.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n AIPAC issued the same tweet<\/a> in response to any statement that fell short of its expectations, such as one by Rep. Greg Casar of Texas<\/a>, which called for a diplomatic resolution: \u201cConsistent pattern: J Street endorsees issue anti-Israel statements. @jstreetdotorg is many things, but it\u2019s not pro-Israel.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The messages reflect one way special interests shape policies in Washington, where a conforming statement is a metric lobbyists can cite to show their dominance. While not everyone received this bombardment of communications from AIPAC officials\u2014particularly progressives who have made their views known about Israel\u2019s actions\u2014judging by a substantial portion of House Democrats, the effort appears to be having an effect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to a review of member statements at their congressional websites and on social media, 28 House Democrats have issued messages saying explicitly that they \u201cstand with Israel,\u201d or some close variation thereof. Another 35 express unequivocal support for Israel without using the magic words \u201cstand with Israel\u201d precisely, but they leave no doubt as to the member\u2019s support. And 16 others express \u201csoft\u201d support for Israel, without quite the same inflammatory language.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Three statements have been held up by AIPAC in particular, according to sources familiar with the situation, as models for others to follow. Those are from Reps. Greg Landsman<\/a> (D-OH), Mike Levin<\/a> (D-CA), and George Whitesides<\/a> (D-CA). All are \u201cfrontline\u201d members who had relatively close elections in 2024.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIsrael is justifiably defending itself and its people,\u201d Landsman said in his statement<\/a>. \u201cIran\u2019s nuclear program isn\u2019t just an existential threat to Israel and the Middle East, it\u2019s a threat to the world \u2026 I stand with Israel and the rest of the West as we confront this threat together.\u201d Levin similarly states<\/a> that \u201cthe Iranian regime \u2026 must never obtain a nuclear weapon \u2026 No nation can be expected to stand by while another openly threatens its existence.\u201d Whitesides, a freshman from northern Los Angeles County, followed suit<\/a>: \u201cThe government of Iran, which has sown death and destruction across the Middle East for decades, cannot be allowed to develop an operational nuclear weapon, and we must stand with our ally Israel.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The \u201cstand with Israel\u201d caucus includes some usual suspects who have long backed up Israel\u2019s actions, from Reps. Ted Lieu<\/a> and Brad Sherman<\/a> in California, to Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz<\/a> and Lois Frankel<\/a> in Florida, to Problem Solvers and New Democrats like Josh Gottheimer<\/a> (D-NJ) and Brad Schneider<\/a> (D-IL). But freshman and swing-state members are also well represented\u2014precisely the type of members who survive on large campaign donations from the likes of AIPAC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n First-term representatives Johnny Olszewski<\/a> (D-MD), April McClain Delaney<\/a> (D-MD), Herbert Conaway<\/a> (D-NJ), John Mannion<\/a> (D-NY), and Suhas Subramanyam<\/a> (D-VA) were all in the explicit \u201cstand with Israel\u201d caucus, while freshman members Luz Rivas<\/a> (D-CA), Sarah Elfreth<\/a> (D-MD), Maggie Goodlander<\/a> (D-NH), Laura Gillen<\/a> (D-NY), and George Latimer<\/a> (D-NY) agreed with the sentiment but without the explicit \u201cstand with Israel\u201d wording. Other members in perennially difficult electoral battles, like Reps. Jared Golden<\/a> (D-ME) and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez<\/a> (D-WA), stood with Israel as well, along with numerous members of the Congressional Black Caucus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ), who recently won the nomination for governor of New Jersey, also released a statement<\/a> that reflected hard support for Israel. Her race in the general election against Republican Jack Ciattarelli will be prohibitively expensive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Expand<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n VINCENT RICCI\/SOPA IMAGES\/SIPA USA VIA AP IMAGES<\/p>\n\n\n\n AIPAC\u2019S URGENCY MAY BE DUE <\/strong>to a somewhat surprising amount of dissent among some congressional Democrats against Israel\u2019s coordinated attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, military sites, and residential compounds, killing senior Iranian commanders and six nuclear scientists along with hundreds of civilians.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For example, Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Israel\u2019s \u201calarming decision to launch airstrikes on Iran\u201d was \u201ca reckless escalation that risks igniting regional violence.\u201d Other military veterans like Reed, such as Reps. Seth Moulton<\/a> (D-MA) and Jason Crow<\/a> (D-CO), were similarly skeptical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sen. Ben Ray Luj\u00e1n (D-NM) echoed the AIPAC-provided language, saying, \u201cThere\u2019s no one here that disagrees that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon.\u201d Yet he expressed concerns about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu\u2019s posture, calling for \u201csecure briefings\u201d that he says have not yet occurred. Luj\u00e1n also pointed to surprising Republican voices, like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who have advocated for noninvolvement, signaling a potential shift in GOP sentiment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These modest splits from the party line have opened new and critical questions about presidential war powers, where several members of the House and Senate are poised to challenge executive authority as the president considers airstrikes against Iran<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe Constitution is very clear that no president can bomb another country or begin a war with the country without the permission of Congress,\u201d Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) insisted. My hope is that there won\u2019t be any U.S. involvement.\u201d Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) echoed this, arguing, \u201cThe president can\u2019t undertake military action without a vote of Congress. Right now, I don\u2019t see any circumstance in which direct U.S. military involvement would make us safer.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Two pieces of legislation aim to quash U.S. involvement. One, introduced by independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, is titled the No War With Iran Act and has seven Democratic co-sponsors. Sen. Tim Kaine\u2019s War Powers Resolution<\/a> seeks to reassert congressional authority over military engagements. In the House, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) announced<\/a> on Monday that he would issue a War Powers Resolution, which quickly got support<\/a> from 15 Democratic members.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But several other U.S. senators seemed to abandon the constitutional role they have in authorizing military action, stating their general opposition to entering the Middle East but\u2014in the words of Indiana Republican Sen. Jim Banks\u2014their absolute \u201ctrust\u201d in Trump.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI trust President Trump. He\u2019s the commander in chief. He\u2019ll decide what role we play,\u201d Banks declared. He framed Trump as a singular force for peace, asserting, \u201cPresident Trump is the greatest peacemaker in my lifetime. If there\u2019s anybody that can avoid war in the Middle East and bring peace, it\u2019s him. He\u2019s done it before.\u201d Banks, a veteran of Afghanistan, tied his stance to a broader rejection of \u201cprolonged \u2018forever wars,\u2019\u201d vowing to dedicate his time in Congress to preventing another Afghanistan-like quagmire. \u201cThat was a mistake, a prolonged forever war. We should never do that again. But President Trump\u2019s not going to allow that to happen.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), a co-sponsor of the No War With Iran Act, lambasted Senate Republicans for their apparent inability to challenge Trump, quipping, \u201cThey\u2019ve all had their spines removed. None of them seem capable of standing up to Donald Trump, which means they cannot fulfill their oaths to the Constitution.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n WHEN ASKED ABOUT PRESSURE<\/strong> from constituents, senators reported varying levels of engagement. Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), who expressed support for action against Iran, said he\u2019s faced little pushback, stating, \u201cI believe we need to move on Iran.\u201d Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) dismissed constituent concerns, noting, \u201cEverybody\u2019s living their own life over here. That\u2019s a long ways away.\u201d He deferred to Trump\u2019s judgment, adding, \u201cWhatever President Trump decides to do, I\u2019m all for helping them out.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-TN) aligned his constituents\u2019 views with Trump\u2019s desire to end the \u201ccarnage,\u201d saying, \u201cThe pressure that I feel is the same that President Trump has articulated. He wants this to come to an end.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sen. John Boozman (R-AR) acknowledged widespread concern, stating, \u201cThe whole country is very concerned about what\u2019s going on over there,\u201d but avoided committing to a specific stance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Conversely, Sen. Murphy noted a lack of appetite for war among his constituents, saying, \u201cThere\u2019s not an appetite in this country for another war in the Middle East.\u201d Luj\u00e1n highlighted the need for more transparency, suggesting that public and congressional unease stems from a lack of information.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That was also the assessment of Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), an early co-sponsor of the War Powers Resolution in the House, who cast the debate in political terms. \u201cDonald Trump took the anti-war lane from us in 2016 and 2024. We have a chance to take it back by clearly opposing Netanyahu\u2019s strikes and being a bold voice for diplomacy,\u201d Khanna said. \u201cDemocrats underestimate how much ordinary Americans are tired of war.\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n David Dayen is the Prospect\u2019s executive editor. His work has appeared in The Intercept, The New Republic, HuffPost, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and more. His most recent book is \u2018Monopolized: Life in the Age of Corporate Power.\u2019<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Ryan Grim is the co-founder of Drop Site News, and the author of \u2018We\u2019ve Got People: From Jesse Jackson to AOC, the End of Big Money and the Rise of a Movement.\u2019<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicolae Butler is a reporter with Migrant Insider, the first and only immigration news outlet inside the Beltway.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Pablo Manriquez is the publisher of Migrant Insider, the first and only immigration news outlet inside the Beltway.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The pro-Israel lobbying group has sent a flurry of communications to members of Congress, citing specific language for them to parrot in support of Israel\u2019s strikes on Iran. BY DAVID DAYEN, RYAN GRIM, NICOLAE BUTLER, PABLO MANRIQUEZ JUNE 18, 2025 (Prospect.org) BRYAN OLIN DOZIER\/NURPHOTO VIA AP Israeli flags are carried during a rally near… Continue reading \n
![\"Drop](\"https:\/\/prospect.org\/downloads\/23085\/download\/Drop%20Site%20News%20061825%202.jpg?cb=da59994869113ba8f4480a6a40f7afb8\")
<\/p>\n\n\n\nDAVID DAYEN<\/a><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
RYAN GRIM<\/a><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
NICOLAE BUTLER<\/a><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
PABLO MANRIQUEZ<\/a><\/h3>\n\n\n\n