Massie revives Democrats' fight over Israel military funding

Democrats are barreling toward their next test of support for Israel as the House prepares to vote on legislation that would zero out most American military assistance.

The House is expected to vote on the measure, sponsored by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), as soon as this week, providing fresh insight into whether a leftward drift on Israel continues to take hold in the Democratic Party. The language would cancel the $3.3 billion Israel receives in foreign military aid, and Massie believes GOP leadership will give him that vote when a State Department and national security funding bill reaches the floor.

Ending direct military aid has gained mainstream support in Washington, and even some Republicans are warming to the idea after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that he wants his country to reduce its “dependence” on the United States.

But few Republicans are expected to back such an abrupt change in U.S. foreign policy, and Democrats are still grappling with how to handle the amendment. Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX), the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, announced his support for the measure on Monday and could bring much of his caucus membership along with him.

On the other side is a wide swathe of Democrats who have traditionally supported the aid and argue the legislation is either ill-advised or too broadly written. Those views were voiced in a Sunday conference call in which House Democrats hashed out how they will vote on spending bill amendments.

“I don’t anticipate getting many Republican votes on it,” Massie told the Washington Examiner. “I suspect one of the reasons why leadership allowed the vote on it was because it will split Democrats down the middle.”

Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) told reporters Monday that House Democrats would have another conversation on the amendment when the entire caucus gathers in person for their weekly meeting on Tuesday.

When pressed for his own view on the amendment, Jeffries sidestepped the question, but House Democratic leadership is thought to oppose the language. Some appropriators have also raised concerns that its prohibition on funding could extend beyond military assistance and affect diplomatic or humanitarian aid.

“I’ll articulate my personal position in the aftermath of the caucus meeting tomorrow morning,” Jeffries said.

The debate over military aid to Israel is taking place as Democrats harden in their opposition to the Netanyahu government and begin to vote en masse against certain weapons sales. In April, more than three-quarters of Senate Democrats voted to ban the sale of 1,000-pound bombs to Israel in protest of its casualty-heavy operations in Gaza and beyond.

Massie, meanwhile, is the rare Republican to oppose almost all types of foreign aid and was unseated in May by a Trump-backed challenger who benefited from a deluge of AIPAC-linked spending in the race.

The Massie amendment does not touch an additional $500 million Israel gets each year in defensive weaponry, including its Iron Dome missile systems. Repealing that funding only attracted four Democrats and two Republicans, one of them Massie, when put to a vote last year.

But it does deal with the vast majority of the funding Israel gets each year as part of an Obama-era memorandum of understanding that gives the country a military edge over its regional adversaries.

Republicans expressed newfound openness to ending the assistance after Netanyahu surprised Washington and began calling for an aggressive wind-down as soon as this Congress. But GOP lawmakers are, by and large, trying not to get ahead of negotiations to renew the memorandum, which is set to expire in 2028, and have rejected past attempts to place restrictions on Israel.

Democrats, by contrast, are more comfortable with the wind-down, with Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) telling the Washington Examiner that he is “more than amenable” to Netanyahu’s proposal to end U.S. assistance, becoming one of the most senior Democrats to express that view.

Schatz is the ranking Democratic appropriator overseeing State Department funding in the Senate and is expected to take over as whip for his caucus in the next Congress.

“Look, from what I’m gathering, there seems to be bipartisan agreement about this, and so the question is, how quickly we can do this,” Schatz said earlier this month. “I think it’s an appropriate conversation to have, and I’m glad that, at least so far, it’s not a partisan question.”

When asked about the timing of a ramp-down, Schatz called the memorandum negotiations an “opportunity to recalibrate this relationship.”

“The timing is right for us to have a tough conversation,” he said.

As of now, it’s unclear whether GOP leadership will actually bring the State Department funding bill to the House floor before the July 4 recess. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) is trying to win over conservative rebels demanding a clearer path forward on an unrelated elections bill, and the dispute derailed House votes last week.

If Johnson is successful in reopening the floor, Massie hopes the House will also vote on an amendment cutting off aid to Jordan.

“I think it makes it more interesting,” Massie said. “Because if you’re a Democrat and you vote to defund Israel, but not Jordan, what are you saying?”

Massie has a third amendment that would strike language directing the Pentagon to expand its cooperation with Israel on defense technology development.

The provision, tucked into a defense policy bill that could also get a vote this week, has been criticized by Massie and other Israel skeptics as a backdoor way for defense hawks to preserve military support if the $3.8 billion goes away.