Dems split on Massie effort to zero out Israel security aid

The House Wednesday shot down an amendment to a State Department spending bill that would have blocked billions in U.S. military aid to Israel, but a substantial number of Democrats voted to cut off Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s war machine.

The chamber defeated Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie’s amendment, 104-314, which would have stripped out $3.3 billion proposed for an Israeli security aid account in the chamber’s fiscal 2027 National Security-State appropriations measure. Among Democrats, 103 supported the amendment, 98 opposed it and 10 voted present. Massie was the lone Republican to support the amendment.

The final vote result showed how many in the Democratic Party have soured on how Netanyahu has used American-made weapons in Gaza, Iran and southern Lebanon. It also revealed new splinters in the party over U.S. aid to Israel just as analysts predict Democrats are on track to take the House and have an outside shot at taking the Senate.

The number of Democrats who support zeroing out the Israel security assistance account going into November’s midterm elections was another example of how much of the political energy in the party is in its most progressive plank.

“The American people are crying out for an end to U.S. tax dollars subsidizing Israel’s military. At a time when millions are struggling to make ends meet, we are sending billions of dollars to a military that has killed tens of thousands of civilians,” Texas Democratic Rep. Greg Casar, chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said in a Tuesday letter to colleagues urging them to support the amendment.

“After the Israeli government has killed more than 70,000 people in Gaza and helped lead the United States into a destabilizing, deadly war with Iran, we are called to act,” Casar added. “The Democratic Party needs a new approach to Israel and Palestine.”

Massie, a longtime critic of President Donald Trump who recently lost his primary to a Trump-backed opponent, said during Wednesday floor remarks that Israel for too long had been “the biggest welfare recipient of the United States.”

“There have been 70,000 casualties in Gaza, and I don’t think we should be part of that. … We’ve got needs at home, which include our infrastructure, our roads and bridges. We’ve got a shortfall in that fund,” he said. “And we’re sending more money to Israel in this bill that we spend on homeless veterans in this country.”

In a June 26 X post, Massie wrote: Netanyahu has “said he wants to reduce Israel’s dependence on U.S. aid; let’s start now.”

House Foreign Affairs member Brad Sherman, D-Calif., on Wednesday accused House Republican leaders of pushing for a floor vote on the amendment to “drive a wedge” between Democrats during an election year.

A party, split

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, in a Tuesday “dear colleague” letter, told his members that leadership was not whipping against the amendment. Rather, he said he would vote “no” because “it is overly broad,” and would hinder humanitarian aid efforts, the resettling of refugees and hamstring efforts to target violent extremist groups like Hamas.

But House Democratic Whip Katherine M. Clark of Massachusetts said in a Wednesday statement that she would vote in favor of the amendment because “the status quo is not tenable,” adding: “We should not provide a blank check for military aid to any country that does not comply with U.S. law, interests, and values.”

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a statement that she voted for the amendment because “the American people are rightly demanding an end to a perpetual cycle of war, and the Netanyahu government cannot maintain its current course.”

Still, the California Democrat called the amendment’s substance “ill-conceived.”

Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar of California on June 30 acknowledged the amendment vote would be a tough one for Democrats, but told reporters Democratic candidates’ stances on Israel would only be one part of their campaign-trail messages to voters.

“It’s tough and emotional for the American people, and they have thoughts and concerns about this and we respect that, we absolutely do. So it’s our job and our responsibility to communicate that, and so we will,” Aguilar said. “Now what we have talked about, too, is we have to also communicate what the Trump administration has done — how they’re ripping away health care from people. That is incredibly important. I understand that people have strong positions on this [amendment].”

“Our focus … is to remind them, you know, what the big picture is. And the big picture is Republicans continue to attack health care and nutrition programs that are used in our communities,” he added. “They’re celebrating it, they’re giving high-fives about it.

Support for Israel aid

But Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, chair of the Appropriations subcommittee that crafted the State Department funding measure, argued Wednesday on the floor that keeping the full proposed amount for important for national security.

“The United States and Israel have worked together on successful military operations, like those in the past year, to decimate Iran’s nuclear program and missile capabilities, and Israel is also using the overwhelming, overwhelming majority of this funding to actually purchase American-made weaponry,” the Florida Republican said. “So it actually helps our defense industrial base and our economy.”

The floor action came as additional U.S. military aid for Israel has become a tricky matter for Democrats.

A New York Times/Siena Research Institute poll released in late May found that nearly three-quarters of Democratic voters (74%) oppose sending Israel additional economic or military aid. Democratic discontent has grown over several years as Netanyahu’s government has used American fighter jets, missile systems, heavy bombs and other American-built combat systems to level Gaza.

Many moderate House Democrats continue to support Israel’s military operations in Gaza, southern Lebanon and replenishing its stockpiles after its joint strikes on Iran with the United States. But most of the caucus’ most left-leaning members want U.S. aid cut off, accusing Israel of carrying out an inhumane military mission in the former Palestinian enclave and now Lebanon.

Some Democrats facing competitive primaries have been under pressure about supporting additional military assistance for Israel. That pressure has intensified after several recent New York City Democratic Party primaries saw wins by very progressive candidates, all of whom have been sharply critical of Israel.

Ohio Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur, listed among the 10 most vulnerable House members recently by CQ Roll Call, late last month described how the Israel aid issue has become fraught for her and other Democrats. She also said no single amendment from a legislative body located outside of the Middle East would suffice.

“I worked for President Jimmy Carter when he achieved the agreement between Egypt and Israel. It was one of the most significant moments in world history. The problem with the current situation is you don’t have that kind of leadership in place in any of the countries that are necessary to reach agreement,” she said. “I represent a huge number of Lebanese-American citizens, who are just heartbroken because of what is happening, Israelis who are just disheartened, and some Palestinians who feel abandoned.

“President Carter had it right. He was able to bring the parties together. We don’t have those kind of leaders now, and people are dying, and it is morally wrong, what is happening,” she added. “It will only be resolved by each of those forces — the Israelis, the Palestinians, the Lebanese — producing the leadership to reach an accord,” she said.

Several House Democrats said recently that their leadership team has been in “listening” mode for weeks about the Massie measure. To that end, Jeffries stated in his letter to Democrats that there would be “good faith reasons that will result in members voting in a variety of different ways.”

One Democratic member, granted anonymity to speak candidly about a private meeting with colleagues, shrugged when asked if Massie’s amendment was creating new fissures inside the caucus.

“We’ve navigated these things before,” this veteran House Democrat said with a slight chuckle.

Aguilar late last month said it was important “to remember it’s very unlikely this bill … is going to become law — with or without the Massie amendment,” adding: “It’s going to go through a lot of changes.”