Democrats weigh a harder line on Israel — but struggle with the details

Progressive Democrats were just a day away from laying down a marker on Israel and forcing their party to vote to withhold billions in funds to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. And then the House GOP’s dysfunction got in the way.

This Video Is Trending Right Now →

After another failed rule vote threw the House floor into chaos, House Republican leaders abruptly sent members home Tuesday night. But before lawmakers left, Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., teed up an amendment vote to strip roughly $3.3 billion in funding for Israel from a broader bill to fund the State Department and other foreign aid programs. 

For Republicans, the vote was just another way in which Massie is breaking from the rest of the GOP. But for Democrats, the amendment had become an interesting question — and an opportunity for their caucus to weigh in on Israel.

While Republicans are expected to overwhelmingly oppose Massie’s amendment, the vote seems to be splitting Democrats.

Some Democrats oppose the amendment simply because they support sending aid to Israel. Others share concerns about Israel but have complaints about how the amendment was drafted. But a growing bloc of progressives plan to back the measure. 

According to Rep. Lois Frankel, D-Fla., the breakdown among Democrats is difficult to predict.

“For a lot of people, it was just the process, and then others are very emotional about the whole thing,” Frankel, who opposes the amendment, told MS NOW on Tuesday. “So I don’t know, I can’t psychoanalyze everybody, and we didn’t take a vote. I have no idea how people are voting.”

Even if, as expected, the amendment fails, progressives think it could mark a significant political milestone.

Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas, chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said the amendment vote will show the momentum behind the push to bar military aid to Israel.

“You’re going to see a growing number of Democrats come out against sending more money for weapons for Netanyahu’s military,” Casar told MS NOW. “In the past, it was just a very, very small number. You could count on maybe one or two hands how many members of Congress would vote against sending the Israeli military money for more weapons.”

Casar’s position is still the insurgent movement within the House Democratic Caucus, as party leaders opposed the measure. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., told reporters his position on Israel “remains the same,” pushing for a two-state solution.

Other leadership-aligned members criticized the idea of broadly banning any funding for Israel through an amendment to an appropriations bill, rather than thoroughly debating the issue on its own merits.

“There’s just too many factors to say it’s that easy to just say we’re taking away $3.3 billion money that we also do in the same way for Egypt and Jordan and other countries around the world,” Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told reporters.

Frankel, the top Democrat on the appropriations subcommittee that funds the State Department, agreed that Massie’s amendment was the wrong venue for the debate over Israel.

“If you’re going to recalibrate our relationship with any foreign country, it shouldn’t be done just with an amendment in an appropriations bill,” Frankel said. “It has to be a very, I think, good, extensive conversation that would bring in a lot of different people.”

Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, also raised concerns about the amendment’s scope, telling MS NOW that it would block not only military assistance but also humanitarian aid, cultural exchanges, embassy funds and more.

But even among critics of the Massie amendment, top Democrats have shown frustration with Netanyahu’s government. 

DeLauro’s campaign announced on Tuesday she would no longer accept contributions from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.