Skip to main content

House vote to end Israel aid divides Democrats, with 103 voting in favor

Washington — House Democrats were sharply divided on whether to cut off aid to Israel during a floor vote on the issue Wednesday, marking the latest flashpoint in the party’s rift over support for the U.S. ally. 

The amendment — which was introduced by GOP Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who has consistently opposed foreign aid — would have eliminated $3.3 billion in assistance to Israel. Massie submitted the amendment to the annual State Department appropriations bill that the House passed later Wednesday. 

The amendment failed in a 104-314-10 vote, with 103 Democrats voting in favor, 98 voting against and 10 voting present. Massie was the sole Republican to support it. 

The issue also split Democratic leaders, who are usually in lockstep. 

In a letter to House Democrats on Tuesday, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said he opposed Massie’s measure, calling it “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.” He said it would also restrict the United States’ ability to confront Hamas and Hezbollah. 

But Jeffries noted the “strongly held views” within the party on the issue and said leaders would not persuade members to vote a certain way. He also called for a “major reset” between the U.S. and Israel. 

On Wednesday, Democratic Whip Katherine Clark of Massachusetts announced she would vote to strip aid from Israel, arguing “the status quo is not tenable.” 

“I will be voting yes, not because I agree with the entirety of the amendment, or the GOP’s cynical motivations for its consideration, but because I believe we must change course. While Democratic members will make different decisions on this amendment in good faith, we are absolutely united in our shared goal of permanent peace,” she said in a statement. 

The vote comes as Democratic candidates’ stances on Israel have been a key test in the party’s primaries. In recent weeks, several incumbent Democrats, who have been supportive of Israel, lost their primaries to progressive challengers who have been highly critical of the U.S. ally. 

Democratic Rep. Greg Casar of Texas, the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, acknowledged concerns about the amendment eliminating humanitarian aid, but said that “opposing the billions in military funding is what’s most important here.” 

“More Democrats than ever before voted to stop sending money to Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, despite the fact that this amendment was an imperfect vehicle for our movement,” Casar said in a statement after the vote. “That is a victory for the millions of Americans who have demanded an end to US taxpayer support for the Israeli military’s war crimes.” 

Darline Graham says she’s ‘not that informed on national security’ at debate

▶ Watch Video: Darline Graham and Ralph Norman head to runoff in South Carolina's Republican Senate primary Sen. Darline Graham fumbled a question on national security in the South Carolina GOP Senate debate, admitting she was "not that informed on national security" and neglecting to answer a question about Taiwan and the South China Sea.  The novice senator is beginning her sixth week on the job, having been appointed to fill her late brother Lindsey Graham's seat two days after his sudden death on July 11. Lack of experience is one of the primary criticisms facing her campaign. At Tuesday's debate, Rep. Ralph Norman, her GOP opponent who also advanced to the runoff behind Graham in the Aug. 11 primary, called her an "unknown candidate" while also representing mainstream Washington."I'm just going to be honest here," Graham answered when asked if Taiwan and the South China Sea are national security issues for the United States. "I'm not that informed on national security, so — but I do support the military."To the same question, Norman cited the importance of Taiwan's chip production and said, "what the president is doing right is he's enabling Taiwan to defend themselves against China."Graham later called China a national security threat, advocating for "any type of bans against China" from AI to farmland, and she also fielded questions on Iran and Israel. The candid revelation, however, has still drawn scrutiny. "Lindsey Graham was well informed on the United States' national security," former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley wrote on X. "Darline Graham admits she's not. This is not something you inherit. And it's critical in the U.S. Senate."The Democratic nominee for the Senate seat also chimed in. "Darline Graham Nordone is asking for six years as South Carolina's senator — during wartime — yet has the gall to tell voters 'national security isn't my thing,'" Dr. Annie Andrews wrote. "South Carolina deserves better."Graham is backed by President Trump. While Lindsey Graham was focused on foreign policy and national security, having returned from a trip to Ukraine to visit President Volodymyr Zelenskyy a day before his death, his sister has vowed to focus on issues affecting South Carolinians. She told CBS News' Mark Strassmann last week that "affordability is a number one issue, definitely for me." Both candidates conveyed strong conservative beliefs and did not vastly differ in their policies. They pledged loyalty to Mr. Trump, agreed Iran was a threat, recognized Israel as an ally and advocated for the SAVE America Act and a ban on birthright citizenship.Graham ended the night on a fiery note, responding to Norman's criticism that she canceled a second debate. "I'd rather be out in South Carolina meeting the voters than here on this stage with you," Graham chirped back.She then touted her work in the Senate thus far, including helping pass the Russia Sanctions Bill, co-sponsoring the SAVE America Act and casting a key vote to confirm Attorney General Todd Blanche. "I've done more in 20 days than you have done in 20 years," Graham said. The runoff for the Republican nominee will be held on Aug. 25. 
Read Next Story