Key facts
- AIPAC's super PAC, United Democracy Project, has spent over $38 million this cycle, exceeding previous records.
- The group is actively intervening in Democratic primaries in Maryland and New York.
- Accusations of 'dark money' and obscured spending through shell PACs have been leveled against AIPAC.
- A significant portion of Democratic voters express opposition to AIPAC's election influence.
- The lobbying group's actions have intensified internal party debates regarding Israel policy and campaign finance.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is facing unprecedented backlash and scrutiny in the current Democratic primary season due to its surge in spending and intervention in key races. The powerful pro-Israel lobbying group's super PAC, the United Democracy Project, has already spent over $38 million this cycle, surpassing its previous records and making its influence a central issue in contests across the country.
In Maryland, AIPAC has invested $5.7 million in a primary to support state Del. Adrian Boafo, the preferred successor to retiring Rep. Steny Hoyer, drawing sharp criticism from rival candidates and Senator Chris Van Hollen. Simultaneously, AIPAC has become a lightning rod in three New York City congressional primaries, where progressive candidates are attempting to unseat Israel-friendly incumbents and secure an open seat. Accusations of undisclosed spending through shell PACs have fueled controversy, solidifying AIPAC's image as a 'bogeyman' within a party grappling with rising criticism of Israel and concerns about 'dark money' in politics.
This year's primary battles are seen as major indicators of AIPAC's continued influence in an increasingly polarized political environment. Chris Coffey, a political strategist, described the backlash as reaching 'new levels' and being 'unprecedented.' AIPAC's spokesperson, Patrick Dorton, defended the group's actions, stating, 'We are here to stay. We’re going to support pro-Israel, progressive Democrats this cycle, next cycle and in the future.'
The group's involvement has ignited a fierce debate within the Democratic party over its role in elections and the approach to supporting the U.S. ally. Some Jewish Democrats and their allies have warned that attacks on AIPAC could be misconstrued as antisemitic, while progressives argue that AIPAC conflates criticism of Israel with antisemitism to stifle dissent. A recent POLITICO poll found that 37% of voters who backed Kamala Harris in 2024 oppose AIPAC's election influence efforts.
AIPAC has adapted its strategy, with United Democracy Project shielding over 40% of its spending through pop-up and pass-through PACs. This approach has been criticized, particularly after the group spent $2 million to unseat former Rep. Tom Malinowski and $22 million on ads in Illinois primaries, often obscuring its direct involvement. In New York City, the issue is particularly acute, with Mayor Zohran Mamdani comparing AIPAC to 'monsters' and critics like Rep. Josh Gottheimer accusing him of 'laundering antisemitism.'
While it remains unclear if United Democracy Project is directly spending in all New York City races, accusations persist. State lawmaker Claire Valdez's campaign alleged AIPAC bankrolled 'Real Fight NYC' to support Antonio Reynoso, a claim denied by Reynoso and Dorton. However, BOLD America, a group supporting Hispanic candidates, received $650,000 from United Democracy Project and is spending on ads boosting Rep. Adriano Espaillat. Incumbents like Rep. Dan Goldman and Espaillat have also benefited from AIPAC-bundled donations, drawing criticism from challengers like Brad Lander, who argues AIPAC's policies divide Jewish voters and do not enhance safety for Israelis or Palestinians.
