In the lead-up to Tuesday’s primaries, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) has emerged as a polarizing force in several key U.S. Senate and congressional races, highlighting shifting attitudes toward the pro-Israel lobby within American politics. Traditionally regarded as a powerful and influential organization, Aipac’s involvement in the 2024 election cycle has generated both significant financial backing and growing backlash.

The Michigan Democratic Senate primary exemplifies the contentious debate surrounding Aipac’s role. Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive former health official, has vigorously criticized his opponent, four-term Representative Haley Stevens, for her acceptance of Aipac’s support. “They’ve set a record in this race to help elect my opponent because they know that she’ll be a reliable vote,” El-Sayed said during a recent debate. Stevens denied being influenced by any special interest group, insisting she is “beholden only to the people of Michigan.” The contest, which voters are expected to decide imminently, underscores the increasingly salient role of pro-Israel lobbying in Democratic primaries.

Aipac, founded in the 1950s, has historically enjoyed broad bipartisan support. Its mission to strengthen U.S.-Israel relations drew considerable backing from liberals in the aftermath of the Holocaust, as a symbol of Jewish safety and empowerment. However, experts note that attitudes have shifted alongside changes in Israeli politics, especially under the leadership of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The organization’s staunch support for Netanyahu’s government and opposition to deals such as the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement have alienated some liberals and progressives in the U.S., contributing to the widening rift between Aipac and parts of the Democratic Party.

The organization’s growing spending power has also attracted scrutiny. Along with its affiliated Super PAC, the United Democracy Project (UDP), Aipac has deployed tens of millions of dollars to influence elections, often targeting Democrats perceived as insufficiently pro-Israel. UDP alone reported $80.3 million in resources as of June 30. Yet, this heavy financial involvement has engendered negative public perceptions, with critics accusing Aipac of exacerbating political polarization and wielding disproportionate influence over U.S. foreign policy.

This backlash is not confined to the left. Some figures on the right, including former Trump administration officials, have accused Aipac of pressuring the U.S. into conflicts in the Middle East, challenging the organization’s alignment with "America First" priorities. For instance, Joe Kent, a former head of counterterrorism, attributed U.S. hostilities against Iran largely to Aipac’s influence.

Recent events in the Middle East — including Israel’s military response following the Hamas attacks in October 2023 and ongoing conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon — have intensified debates over U.S. support for Israel. Progressive candidates such as Brad Lander in New York have leveraged opposition to Aipac to appeal to voters, framing the group as emblematic of excessive special interest influence. Lander, who campaigns against U.S. military aid to Israel, won a primary against an Aipac-endorsed incumbent, highlighting the potency of this narrative.

Aipac representatives reject allegations that the group acts as a proxy for any foreign government or politician, emphasizing their focus on advancing bipartisan American policy that supports the U.S.-Israel relationship. “Nearly 7 million Americans across diverse backgrounds belong to Aipac because they support strengthening the alliance,” said spokesperson Deryn Sousa. She added that 188 candidates endorsed by Aipac have won so far this cycle, although some races resulted in victories for candidates opposed by the organization.

The intensifying criticism toward Aipac is part of a broader skepticism about the role of big-money lobbying in U.S. elections. Observers note that campaigns in 2024 are becoming referendums on the influence of political action committees, including those funded by Wall Street, tech sectors, and special interest groups like Aipac. As political polarization deepens, the future influence of pro-Israel lobbying in American elections remains uncertain.