One of the most powerful lobbying groups in American politics is walking away from the business of endorsing candidates. In a letter to its members on Oct. 21, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, said it would no longer endorse candidates, make direct contributions through its political action committee, or earmark member donations for campaigns — a striking reversal of the electoral strategy it adopted in 2021, with less than two weeks until the Nov. 3 midterm elections.
The U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. AIPAC told its members this week it will stop endorsing candidates and making direct PAC contributions.
The Letter That Upended AIPAC's Playbook
The Oct. 21 letter, signed by AIPAC's leadership and first reported by NPR and Jewish Insider, was blunt about the political weather the lobby faces. It said the group "achieved important victories" and "suffered hard-fought losses" during the 2026 election cycle, but described this year as "one of the most challenging environments in recent memory," according to USA Today.
"To win the fight for the future of the country and the U.S.-Israel alliance, we must build a more strategic, consequential and nimble political operation," the letter said. The key line, repeated across coverage of the announcement: "Endorsements, direct PAC contributions and earmarking will no longer be part of our approach, so we can expand individual giving and utilize new tools to help our friends win."
Instead of endorsing, AIPAC will encourage and organize its members to give directly to favored candidates, and it will steer its resources toward other like-minded organizations, the group's leaders said. Its website will no longer carry a list of endorsed candidates that supporters can click through to fund.
A 2021 Experiment Comes to an End
The decision closes a chapter that began only five years ago. For most of its history since its founding in 1954, AIPAC did not endorse candidates or run a PAC, according to reporting on the announcement. That changed in late 2021, ahead of the 2022 midterms, when the group launched AIPAC PAC — a traditional committee that can donate up to $5,000 per candidate per election under Federal Election Commission rules — alongside the United Democracy Project, a super PAC that can accept and spend unlimited amounts.
The experiment turned AIPAC into a fundraising juggernaut. The group raised about $233 million during this election cycle, according to federal campaign finance records cited by USA Today. In 2025, AIPAC PAC was the largest PAC contributor to candidates and political committees in the entire country, giving $26.8 million, according to FEC data. AIPAC's own accounting claims the effort helped 290 pro-Israel candidates win elections this cycle and prevented 29 "detractors" from winning.
But the lobby says its true strength always lay elsewhere. A spokeswoman told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that members contributed more than $90 million directly to candidates this cycle, including donations earmarked through the AIPAC portal — compared with roughly $3 million handed out directly by the PAC itself. "Our mission and strategy remain the same," she said.
Why the Lobby Is Retreating Now
The retreat comes as support for Israel has fallen sharply among the American public, and as an AIPAC endorsement has begun to look like a political liability rather than an asset.
About 60 percent of U.S. adults now hold an unfavorable view of Israel, according to a Pew Research Center survey released in April — up from 53 percent last year. Opposition to the lobby has intensified since Israel's war in Gaza, launched in response to the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks, and it now comes from both the progressive left and conservative factions, USA Today reported.
Many candidates endorsed by AIPAC this cycle have faced stiff opposition, and some have rejected its money outright. Prominent Democrats including Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Ruben Gallego of Arizona, along with California Gov. Gavin Newsom, have pledged to refuse AIPAC contributions, according to Newsmax. In July, 103 House Democrats backed an unsuccessful amendment to cut U.S. aid to Israel; AIPAC subsequently suspended fundraising for 18 House Democrats who supported the measure, Jewish Insider reported.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) traded barbs with AIPAC on X on Oct. 22 over the lobby's spending in Michigan's Senate race.
The Michigan Flashpoint: Sanders vs. AIPAC
The announcement landed in the middle of a bitter public fight between AIPAC and Sen. Bernie Sanders over Michigan's U.S. Senate race — and the exchange showed exactly how radioactive the lobby's brand has become.
AIPAC spent about $33 million trying to defeat Democrat Abdul El-Sayed in his primary battle against Rep. Haley Stevens, according to USA Today — El-Sayed won the nomination anyway. Now, according to a New York Times report cited by Newsmax, AIPAC has begun contributing to the Great Lakes Conservatives Fund, a super PAC backing El-Sayed's Republican opponent, Mike Rogers, after an Oct. 14 disclosure deadline that kept the donations out of pre-election filings. The Rogers-aligned group disclosed a $4.6 million advertising purchase in Michigan last week.
On Oct. 22, Sanders torched the group on X. "AIPAC is now spending as much as $9 million against Abdul El-Sayed. AIPAC is why we're at war in Iran," Sanders wrote. "AIPAC is why the U.S. has supported genocide in Gaza. We must say NO to AIPAC."
The lobby fired back about 90 minutes later, mocking him: "AIPAC is why your fantasy football team stinks," its post said. "AIPAC is why the weather is bad. AIPAC is why you need an app to park. Say NO to Bernie's obsessive scapegoating."
The spat was notable for another reason, the Times noted: AIPAC has rarely supported a Republican in a competitive general election, making its move against El-Sayed an unusual intervention.
The Money Doesn't Disappear: The Super PAC Lives On
For all the drama of the announcement, AIPAC is not leaving the battlefield. The United Democracy Project super PAC will keep operating — and it remains, in the words of an AIPAC spokeswoman, "one of the most important tools that AIPAC members use to help defeat anti-Israel candidates." The super PAC raised more than $110 million this election cycle and spent more than $80 million through Sept. 30, according to Newsmax. AIPAC spent more than $91 million this year across its PAC and super PAC combined, the Washington Sun reported.
That has drawn a skeptical response from the lobby's critics. A new group called American Priorities, started this year to support anti-AIPAC candidates, argued that an endorsement from the pro-Israel group has become a liability — and that dropping endorsements and direct contributions makes AIPAC less transparent, not weaker.
"This retreat does not change the odds American Priorities is up against, but it is a direct response to the success of our efforts in pushing Democrats to listen to their constituents," spokesman Greg Krieg said in a statement to USA Today.
A speaker at AIPAC's 2016 policy conference. The group said its United Democracy Project super PAC will keep operating.
What This Means
Strip away the spin, and the announcement is an admission: the most visible parts of AIPAC's political operation — the endorsement, the branded check, the name on a candidate's donor list — had become toxic. When a lobbying group concludes that its own public support hurts the candidates it wants to help, it retreats from view. The shift to "organized individual giving" keeps the money flowing while removing the label that opponents like Sanders have learned to weaponize.
It is also a measure of how fast the ground has shifted. Five years ago, AIPAC's 2021 decision to enter direct electoral politics was a show of strength. Now, with public opinion on Israel at its weakest in modern polling and progressive and conservative critics both attacking the lobby's influence, its own leadership describes "one of the most challenging environments in recent memory."
The question is whether the rebrand works. AIPAC insists the change is about effectiveness, not retreat — about putting resources where its strength actually lies, in the organized giving of its members. Critics see a shell game: the same spending, routed through channels that are harder to trace to a single controversial name.
What Happens Next
The immediate test comes in less than two weeks. Michigan's Senate race, where AIPAC is pouring millions into the contest against El-Sayed, will show whether the lobby's money still moves votes when its name is on the checks. Longer term, other interest groups watching a toxic brand drag down their candidates could follow the same playbook: keep the super PAC, drop the endorsement, and let individual donors carry the flag. The 2028 cycle will show whether this was a tactical retreat — or the beginning of a new era in which Washington's most powerful lobbies prefer to spend in the shadows.
Post a Comment