Republican Mike Rogers Warns Against AIPAC Support

Is the political standing of AIPAC declining within the United States? The powerful pro-Israel lobby group is increasingly becoming a liability for both the progressive as well as the right-wing. US Republican leader Mike Rogers and his allies have reportedly asked the pro-Israel lobby American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) not to run a campaign on his behalf ahead of the November general election.

Rogers, who is a Republican Senate candidate from Michigan, home to one of the country's largest Arab American populations, fears that open AIPAC support might backfire. According to a US media outlet, the request to the pro-Israel lobby came after Rogers met the AIPAC chair Michael Tuchin in Los Angeles last week.

This comes as the powerful pro-Israel lobby group has been facing mounting pressure from the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, which has been largely critical of Israel and its ongoing genocidal war in Gaza. But now even Republican party candidates are looking to distance themselves from the group as a growing number of Americans, both on the left and right, have started to challenge US support for Israel.

So, what is AIPAC and why is an increasing number of US politicians refusing to receive its support? Here's what we know: AIPAC is officially a non-partisan group that advocates unconditional US support for Israel and pushes back against any criticism of Israeli governments and their human rights record. It was established in 1954 under its original name, the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs.

Its founding objective was to persuade Congress to fund Israel's economy and the absorption of Jewish refugees and was framed as an American national interest rather than a special-interest favour. After the 1967 Six-Day War and the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, its focus widened to military aid, advocating before US Congress members for military aid and joint defence cooperation for Israel.

AIPAC itself gave nothing to electoral candidates until the early 1980s, when it began using a network of separately incorporated pro-Israel political action committees (PACs), private groups that pool contributions from people and donate them to political campaigns. That funding has been bipartisan, with AIPAC wielding significant influence in both parties; that was until a split emerged among Democrats, with progressives such as Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar entering Congress around 2018 and pushing to condition military aid on human rights compliance.

In December 2021, it changed strategy, directly spending through AIPAC PAC and AIPAC affiliate Super PAC United Democracy Project (UDP). Super PACs are funded by individuals, unions, and corporations and can donate unlimited amounts to independent organisations linked to a candidate. AIPAC said the shift was forced by a changed Washington, with its then-president, Betsy Berns Korn, citing hyperpartisanship, high congressional turnover, and the exponential growth in campaign costs.

What has AIPAC's strategy been ahead of November's elections? AIPAC has focused on Democratic primaries in liberal-leaning congressional districts, as it has since the 2022 primaries, when progressives are more likely to succeed. Track AIPAC, an organisation that records the group's funding of US politicians, has revealed that AIPAC spent more than $6 million on just one Democratic Party candidate, Melissa Hernandez, who ran and lost against progressive Democrat California state Sen.

Aisha Wahab just took part in a special election for California's 14th district. Meanwhile, data from factcheck.org shows UDP alone raised about $104m during the 2026 cycle. That figure is $87.1 million more than what it collected back in 2024. The nonprofit site tracks this spending closely.

In Michigan's Senate Democratic primary, the group spent more than $30m backing four-term Congress member Haley Stevens against Abdul El-Sayed. This opponent is an epidemiologist and former public health official. It marks the most money AIPAC has ever poured into one single contest. Despite that massive outlay, El-Sayed won the primary election. He focused his campaign on health for all and the Palestinian issue. Now he faces Rogers in the November general election.

AIPAC has relied heavily on shell PACs to obscure its spending within Democratic primaries. In the Michigan Democratic primaries specifically, a newly formed group called A Stronger Michigan donated $17m. That PAC got mostly bankrolled by a nonprofit named Center Forward. The stated mission for Center Forward is to foster partisanship. A Stronger Michigan also received funds from another PAC established this year called Michigan Forward 2026.

Mid-March saw elections in Illinois where AIPAC used three different PACs to advertise support for congressional candidate Bushra Amiwala. They did this to siphon off votes from more viable progressive candidates. Palestinian American activist Kat Abughazaleh was one such candidate who ended up losing the race narrowly.

AIPAC still wields enormous influence in US politics today. Aid packages to Israel continue to pass by wide margins, and it retains the largest war chest of any single-issue lobby in Washington. However, recent efforts to sway US election results toward candidates who support Israel have faced real setbacks. Part of that backlash comes from broader public disillusionment with Israel-backed policies. This includes the joint US-Israeli war against Iran and the genocidal assault on Gaza, both of which AIPAC supports.

Some politicians who previously received support from the group are now disavowing it. Last October, Democrat Congressman Seth Moulton distanced himself from AIPAC. He cited the group's support for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a reason. The prominent lawmaker announced he would also return donations from AIPAC. "In recent years, AIPAC has aligned itself too closely with Prime Minister Netanyahu's government," Moulton said in a statement. "I'm a friend of Israel, but not of its current government, and AIPAC's mission today is to back that government. I don't support that direction." That is why he decided to return the donations he received and will not accept their support going forward.

According to The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research conducted in June, 58 percent of Democrats said the US is too supportive of Israel. That number jumped from 45 percent back in January 2024. Meanwhile, 60 percent of Republicans said the US support is about right. But as Israel's war in Palestine, Iran and south Lebanon continues, AIPAC has also begun losing support from Republican candidates.

Besides Roger's recent request from the group in Michigan, last August the lobby group accused right-wing Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene of betraying American values over her criticism of Israel. Greene shot back by saying that AIPAC serves the interests of a foreign government. "I'm as AMERICAN as they come!" she responded firmly. The tension remains high on both sides of the aisle.

I cannot be bought, and I am not backing down," she wrote in a social media post. This defiant stance highlights the deep divisions currently shaping American politics. AIPAC has, however, repeatedly rejected the notion that it is a lobby group that serves a foreign government. Instead, the organization presents itself as a coalition of engaged Americans who view a close US-Israel alliance as beneficial for both countries. They argue this partnership strengthens security and promotes democracy across the region. "As proud, pro-Israel Americans, we will never apologise for participating in the political process and standing up to those who undermine our shared values," the group said in a recent email to supporters that listed the Senate race in Michigan as critical. Critics see these actions as evidence of undue foreign influence on domestic elections. Supporters insist that their advocacy protects national interests abroad. The debate continues over where exactly the line should be drawn between legitimate diplomacy and improper interference.