Jeffries opposes Massie amendment to cut off U.S. aid to Israel as Democrats split

US House defeats bid to cut off Israel aid in vote dividing Democrats

The US House of Representatives defeated an amendment to cut off aid to Israel on Wednesday, despite nearly half of Democrats ​supporting it, reflecting a growing rupture between US progressives and Israel over its attacks in Gaza. The House voted 314 to ‌104 to defeat the measure, offered as an amendment to a State Department spending bill by Republican Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky. However, 103 Democrats and one Republican backed it, a sharp departure from years in which bills supporting Israel passed almost unanimously. Left-wing Democrats are pushing to end US aid to Israel as they campaign in ​midterm election primaries, while moderate Democrats promote sending money that would be used for defensive weapons only. Massie is a fiscal hawk who ​opposes all foreign aid, but he said he was also responding to the heavy toll on civilians of ⁠Israel’s attacks in Gaza. “There have been 70,000 casualties in Gaza, and I don’t think we should be part of that,” he said during the House ​debate. His amendment would have barred any funding in the appropriations bill from being used for Israel, and blocked $3.3 billion in annual security assistance Washington sends ​Israel. The Gaza health ministry has said Israel’s offensive on the Strip, which began in October 2023, killed more than 73,000 Palestinians. Much of the enclave lies in ruin. Nearly all of Gaza’s two million people, most of whom have been displaced several ​times, now live on a tiny strip of land along the coast, mainly in makeshift tents or damaged buildings. Shifting views on Israel Wednesday’s vote would ​have been largely symbolic even if the House had backed the amendment. To become law, it would have had to pass the Senate and override an almost ‌certain veto ⁠by US President Donald Trump, who has made support for Israel a central piece of his foreign policy. Military aid to Israel, and US political campaign contributions from Israel’s backers to candidates, have been a flashpoint for Democrats this year. Criticism of Israel by US political leaders marks a dramatic shift. Massie’s amendment sought to cut off annual funding included in a 2016 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Israel, which is effective until 2028. In September 2016, the House ​voted 405 to 4 in favour ​of a resolution supporting that ⁠MoU. Candidates have scored upset wins by running on a range of progressive issues, including opposition to Israel’s attacks in Gaza and even questioning the country’s right to exist. The issue has also divided party leaders. Representative Hakeem ​Jeffries of New York, the House Democratic leader, said on Tuesday he would oppose Massie’s amendment, saying it ​was “too broad.” But on ⁠Wednesday, No. 2 House Democrat, Representative Katherine Clark of Massachusetts, said she would support it. “We should not provide a blank check for military aid to any country that does not comply with US law, interests, and values,” she said in a statement. Last month, influential Representative Adriano Espaillat lost in a New York ⁠Democratic primary ​to Democratic Socialists of America member Darializa Avila Chevalier. She had the backing of ​New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who also identifies as a democratic socialist. Israel’s standing with Democrats will be tested again on August 4, when Michigan voters nominate candidates running for ​US Senate, the US House and governor as the state debates US relations with Israel.

4 hours ago

The Democrats Face Another Divisive Vote on Military Aid to Israel

A legislative amendment that would block U.S. security aid to Israel has split Democrats in Congress to such an extent that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has decided not to urge his party to oppose it. Instead, he told Democrats to vote their conscience, setting up an opportunity for lawmakers to go on the record about their views. Some are already doing so.“The Democratic Party as a whole needs to shift its policy on Israel and Palestine,” Representative Greg Casar, the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told me. “I think that was clear during the last presidential election. I think it’s clear to me as a moral issue. And I think that [Wednesday’s] vote could be one step towards us beginning to shift our position as a party.”The amendment in question, brought by GOP Representative Thomas Massie, would cut $3.3 billion in security assistance that the U.S. has pledged to Israel between 2019 and 2028 and further stipulates that “none of the funds made available under this Act shall be obligated or expended for Israel.” Lawmakers are expected to vote Wednesday on the amendment, which Massie is hoping to attach to a $47 billion foreign affairs spending bill.On Tuesday, Jeffries wrote in a “Dear Colleagues” letter that he was planning to vote against the amendment but had decided not to whip the caucus into joining him, underscoring how divided the Democrats have become on the question of America’s relationship with Israel.In his letter, Jeffries wrote that he opposes the amendment because it is “overly broad,” prohibiting the use of funds for nonmilitary activities like U.S. embassy operations and humanitarian aid. He also expressed concern that Republicans will “weaponize” the amendment against Democrats—a potential reference to Republicans accusing Democrats of antisemitism for opposing aid to Israel.Even though Jeffries will vote against the amendment, his letter calls for a “change in direction,” signaling how much Democrats have changed their views toward aid for Israel. “Israel has an advanced economy and is capable of paying for its own sophisticated weapons,” he wrote. Future security agreements between the two countries, he wrote, should “strictly adhere to our human rights laws and values.”Representative Ocasio Cortez, who plans to vote “yes” on the amendment, told me that she thinks Jeffries’s decision not to whip “no” votes provides “flexibility” for Democrats to vote their conscience. Jeffries’s letter mirrors the advice given by J Street, the liberal Zionist advocacy organization. In a statement on Tuesday, J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami wrote that the amendment is “poorly drafted, overly broad and being used by Republican leadership to divide Democrats rather than advance a serious debate about US policy.” Despite that, Ben-Ami wrote, the organization supports whatever votes members choose to cast. Some Democrats will likely vote “present” to avoid a hard “yes” or “no” vote, a decision J Street says it supports.Casar weighed in on the amendment in his own letter, explaining why he plans to vote for the amendment and encouraging the caucus to do the same. “The Democratic Party needs a new approach to Israel and Palestine,” Casar wrote. “I hope you will join me in beginning that process by voting yes on this amendment.”Casar said that winning over Democrats who have previously supported aid to Israel will be critical to the amendment’s passage. “For us to achieve the goal of restricting military aid to the Israeli military, we have to have members that previously voted for aid, and I expect that you’ll see that if we have the vote,” he told me.Though elected Democrats are divided on the issue, the party faithful’s views are clearer. According to a New York Times/Siena poll from May, 74 percent of potential Democratic voters oppose “providing additional economic and military support to Israel.” Just 20 percent support it.Despite this, the Massie amendment is still expected to fail, as nearly all Republicans are expected to vote against it.

1 day ago

The Democrats Face Another Divisive Vote on Military Aid to Israel

A legislative amendment that would block U.S. security aid to Israel has split Democrats in Congress to such an extent that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has decided not to urge his party to oppose it. Instead, he told Democrats to vote their conscience, setting up an opportunity for lawmakers to go on the record about their views. Some are already doing so.“The Democratic Party as a whole needs to shift its policy on Israel and Palestine,” Rep. Greg Casar, the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told me. “I think that was clear during the last presidential election. I think it’s clear to me as a moral issue. And I think that [Wednesday’s] vote could be one step towards us beginning to shift our position as a party.”The amendment in question, brought by GOP Representative Thomas Massie, would cut $3.3 billion in security assistance that the U.S. has pledged to Israel between 2019 and 2028 and further stipulates that “none of the funds made available under this Act shall be obligated or expended for Israel.” Lawmakers are expected to vote Wednesday on the amendment, which Massie is hoping to attach to a $47 billion foreign-affairs spending bill.On Tuesday, Jeffries wrote in a “Dear Colleagues” letter that he was planning to vote against the amendment, but had decided not to whip the caucus into joining him, underscoring how divided the Democrats have become on the question of America’s relationship with Israel.In his letter, Jeffries wrote that he opposes the amendment because it is “overly broad,” prohibiting the use of funds for non-military activities like U.S. embassy operations and humanitarian aid. He also expressed concern that Republicans will “weaponize” the amendment against Democrats—a potential reference to Republicans accusing Democrats of antisemitism for opposing aid to Israel.Even though Jeffries will vote against the amendment, his letter calls for a “change in direction,” signaling how much Democrats have changed their views towards aid for Israel. “Israel has an advanced economy and is capable of paying for its own sophisticated weapons,” he wrote. Future security agreements between the two countries, he wrote, should “strictly adhere to our human rights laws and values.”Rep. Ocasio Cortez, who plans to vote yes on the amendment, told me that she thinks Jeffries’s decision not to whip “no” votes provides “flexibility” for Democrats to vote their conscience. Jeffries’s letter mirrors the advice given by J Street, the liberal Zionist advocacy organization. In a statement on Tuesday, J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami wrote that the amendment is “poorly drafted, overly broad and being used by Republican leadership to divide Democrats rather than advance a serious debate about US policy.”Despite that, Ben-Ami wrote, the organization supports whatever votes members choose to cast. Some Democrats will likely vote “present” to avoid a hard “yes” or “no” vote, a decision J Street says it supports.Casar weighed in on the amendment in his own letter, explaining why he plans to vote for the amendment and encouraging the caucus to do the same. “The Democratic Party needs a new approach to Israel and Palestine,” Casar wrote. “I hope you will join me in beginning that process by voting yes on this amendment.”Casar said that winning over Democrats who have previously supported aid to Israel will be critical to the amendment’s passage. “For us to achieve the goal of restricting military aid to the Israeli military, we have to have members that previously voted for aid, and I expect that you’ll see that if we have the vote,” he told me.Though elected Democrats are divided on the issue, the party faithful’s views are clearer. According to a New York Times/Siena poll from May, 74 percent of potential Democratic voters oppose “providing additional economic and military support to Israel.” Just 20 percent support it.Despite this, the Massie amendment is still expected to fail, as nearly all Republicans are expected to vote against it.

1 day ago

Jeffries Opposes Bid to Cut Off Aid to Israel as Democrats Split

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has announced that he will vote against Representative Thomas Massie’s measure to cut off all aid to Israel—even though it’s a policy that the vast majority of Democratic voters agree with.“I will be voting no on Republican Amendment #8.… It is overly broad in that it prohibits or would limit the use of funds for longstanding initiatives related to humanitarian aid, refugee resettlement, peace-building and U.S. Embassy operations,” Jeffries wrote in a letter to his Democratic colleagues Tuesday. “In addition, the so-called Massie amendment would restrict our country’s ability to confront Hamas, Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations in the region who are sworn enemies of both the United States and Israel. In my view, there are more decisive ways to achieve the urgent change necessary when it comes to the far-right Netanyahu government.”In his letter, Jeffries noted that the liberal organization J Street also opposed the measure. In response, the Jewish group hedged its opposition, saying it supports Jeffries’s position while also respecting that he won’t whip against the measure. The group suggested that Democrats could vote “no, present or yes” to reflect their concerns about “the way American military assistance and American-supplied weapons have been used by the Israeli government in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon and elsewhere.”Jeffries opposed the amendment while mentioning that the U.S. and Israel need a “new security arrangement” that would “undergird the maintenance of Israel’s qualitative military edge against Iran and other malign actors in the region.”Dozens of Democrats are expected to vote for the amendment, which would be attached to the spending bill.Jeffries’s letter reveals the ideological gap between party leadership and the party’s base. The second-most-powerful Democrat in the country thinks that cutting off aid to Israel—which has been committing a genocide against Palestinians for nearly three years—is too extreme, and that the problem lies solely with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and not the decades of apartheid that preceded his nonconsecutive 20 years in leadership.This isn’t just coming from congressional Democrats. California Governor and 2028 presidential hopeful Gavin Newsom refused to call Israel an apartheid state and doubled down on his support for Israel in an interview with Axios on Monday. And even Democratic Representative Ro Khanna—who was just held at gunpoint by Israeli settlers on his trip to the West Bank—stopped short of calling for a full embargo against the Israeli government.“Inexcusable moral failure by the ‘opposition’ party leadership,” Middle East analyst Omar Baddar wrote on X. “If a genocide (sniper bullets in the heads of toddlers, systematically murdered medics & journalists, rape of prisoners … etc.) isn’t a red line, then what the hell is?!”

1 day ago