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.
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.
“She did in prior years when she believed Israel was acting like a strategic partner and was committed to a two-state solution,” Allison Dodge, DeLauro’s campaign manager, said in a statement.
To supporters of the measure, complaints about blocking diplomatic funds represent a tiny portion of the issue. Casar acknowledged that the measure may block between $30 million and $55 million in diplomatic funds — or 1% to 2% of the $3.3 billion military funding total. He explained his reasoning to colleagues in a private conference call on Sunday with House Democrats, though he declined to share details of what he said.
“It’s really important for members to recognize that, while a relatively very small amount of diplomatic funding could be implicated on the amendment, not just an overwhelming, but virtually all of the money, is military financing that the Israeli military has used to buy fighter planes and attack helicopters,” Casar told MS NOW.
The spotlight on the Massie amendment — despite complaints about its all-or-nothing nature — has only grown in recent weeks, as GOP leaders have prevented other Israel votes and progressive challengers campaign aggressively against aid to Israel and more established Democrats.
The House Rules Committee barred a vote on another proposal — proposed by Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif. — to add a provision to the annual defense authorization bill effectively barring coordination between the U.S. and Israeli militaries on data sharing, artificial intelligence and other measures.
Democrats also unsuccessfully tried to add more nuanced amendments to the same appropriations bill and were rejected.
Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill., offered two amendments during an April markup. One would have prohibited funds for the expansion of settlements of the demolition of civilian buildings in the West Bank of Gaza. Another would have provided $400 million for the reconstruction of civilian infrastructure there.
Quigley withdrew the first, and Republicans defeated the second in a 25-32 vote.
Quigley offered both measures again for floor votes, and the House Rules Committee blocked both.
The Illinois Democrat said Monday he was undecided on Massie’s amendment, noting he was concerned about how the ban on diplomatic funds could hinder humanitarian efforts. But he held out little hope for a middle ground that could unite lawmakers, blaming Netanyahu.
“When I got here, Israel wasn’t a partisan issue,” Quigley told MS NOW. “Bibi has made it one.”
Syedah Asghar and Kevin Frey contributed to this report.
The post Democrats weigh a harder line on Israel — but struggle with the details appeared first on MS NOW.
Author: Source Author
From MS Now.
Leave a Reply