Aipac’s Cash Complicates Crowded Illinois Primaries

CHICAGO — Democrats watching the open-seat primary in Illinois’ 9th Congressional District have been searching for signs of whether backlash to pro-Israel outside spending could scramble another crowded race.

They got their answer when a super PAC called Elect Chicago Women, which is aligned with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, started broadcasting an ad against progressive candidate Daniel Biss, a move that could unintentionally elevate the candidacy of a Palestinian American progressive candidate who’s even further to the left of Biss.

In a statement about the new ad, the Biss campaign alluded to the role AIPAC could play in throwing the race to a different candidate, saying, “Voters won’t be fooled by these slimy dark-money ads, and they won’t allow right-wing special interests to pick our next member of Congress.”

There are 15 candidates in the Illinois primary, which is March 17, and Biss and state Sen. Laura Fine appear to lead the list, with Kat Abughazaleh, a social media influencer who only recently moved to Illinois, coming in third in most polls.

"The attack ads are calling [Biss] a phony or fake progressive. And that message could shift more voters to Kat," said Frank Calabrese, a Chicago political consultant who’s been following the race.

But even as a super PAC aligned with AIPAC has poured more than $1 million into supporting Fine, political insiders say the dynamics don’t exactly mirror what happened earlier this month in New Jersey. AIPAC poured roughly $2 million into a Democratic special House primary in the state to defeat former Rep. Tom Malinowski and inadvertently angered enough voters that they selected a more progressive Democrat.

For those counting on AIPAC’s involvement to throw the race to unexpected candidates, some Illinois Democrats caution against assuming a New Jersey-style backlash.

Former state Sen. Jeff Schoenberg, who backs Fine, argues that the political terrain is distinct. Unlike in New Jersey, Illinois’ 9th District has been represented for more than 60 years by Jewish lawmakers, and the current Illinois field includes multiple Jewish candidates. Biss is Jewish, as is Fine. That fact, Schoenberg said, complicates any effort to consolidate opposition around identity because the race is drawing interest wider than AIPAC, including from J Street, the more liberal pro-Israel lobbying group.

“Voters in this district who are in their 50s, 60s and older recognize the historic significance of the seat for Jewish representation in Congress,” Schoenberg said.

That thinking suggests other contenders — including Abughazaleh, who has a strong online following — are unlikely to see a similar boost tied specifically to backlash over pro-Israel spending.

Despite the differentiators between the New Jersey race and the Illinois primaries, Democrats are eyeing AIPAC’s involvement in contested primary races, including in Chicago and its suburbs, where three political action committees connected to AIPAC — Elect Chicago Women, along with United Democracy Project and Affordable Chicago Now — are supporting candidates in four crowded Democratic congressional races, including one to fill the shoes of retiring Rep. Jan Schakowsky in the 9th.

“Their heavy-handed campaign against Malinowski, a pretty moderate former congressman, for having the temerity to suggest that he would condition support for military funding for Israel on an end to the siege of Gaza and expansion of settlements backfired spectacularly and dug their already low standing with Democratic voters even deeper,” political strategist David Axelrod told POLITICO. “This is not lost on Democratic voters in the 9th, and the money they're spending to try and boost Laura Fine and defeat Dan Biss may turn out to be the albatross that sinks her.”

Axelrod says the way any negative attacks by AIPAC-aligned groups are perceived by voters “will be filtered through that prism.”

“If people recognize the source as AIPAC by another name, the tactics and funder of the ads may overwhelm their message and wreck their intended beneficiary,” Axelrod said.

Whether it would boost a third candidate in the race, like Abughazaleh, forcing Biss to respond, that’s “possible, though less likely than Jersey,” said Axelrod.

“But it's curious why AIPAC feels these kamikaze missions are beneficial to them or Israel, if they become ‘Scarlet Letter’ underwriters of negative campaigns that make them the target,” Axelrod said.

AIPAC did not return requests for comment.

Schakowsky’s 9th District, which is anchored in Chicago’s North Shore and including Evanston, is one of the most reliably Democratic and heavily Jewish districts in the country. Its primary electorate skews older, highly educated and progressive. They are tuned in politically, making them likely to notice when outside groups suddenly blanket the airwaves and their mailboxes, as has been the case the past week.

Fine, a center-left legislator, has benefited from a rapid influx of super PAC spending — Elect Chicago Women has spent more than $1 million on a steady stream of TV and mail advertisements. The super PAC is also supporting former Rep. Melissa Bean, who’s running to get back the suburban 8th District seat she lost more than a decade ago.

Elect Chicago Women doesn’t reference AIPAC in its messaging, and its ads don’t focus on Israel. But the scale of the spending has made it impossible to ignore.

The two other AIPAC-aligned groups are involved in majority-Black districts that include areas of Chicago’s South Side.The United Democracy Project is behind ads for Melissa Conyears-Ervin in the 7th District, and the Affordable Chicago Now committee is out with ads supporting Democrat Donna Miller in the 2nd District. That independent support, which is not coordinated with the campaigns, prompted Schakowsky to pull back an earlier endorsement she had made for Miller.

“There’s a segment of voters that’s going to be turned off by AIPAC being involved,” said a person familiar with Fine’s campaign, adding, they probably aren’t aligned with Fine, anyway.

Steve Rabinowitz, a veteran Democratic media strategist involved in Jewish causes, agrees, adding, “AIPAC’s brand has been well known for years, even if their direct play is relatively new. I think the Democrats on the far left are easily offended by lots of things and AIPAC’s just among them.”

The dividing line in the Democratic Party animating AIPAC’s involvement in the races focuses on opposition to placing new conditions on U.S. aid to Israel. This is less about Israel’s right to exist or support for a two-state solution, which all the candidates have embraced.

Instead, it’s about whether a member of Congress would entertain added conditional measures such as the “Block the Bombs Act,” which “requires Israel’s government to establish in writing the use of offensive weapons in accordance with US and International law, and it must be approved by Congress through a joint resolution,” according to a press release put out by sponsor Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.).

Fine says she supports the conditions already placed on aid to Israel.

“I’ve been consistent in my position that I believe Israel has a right to defend itself. I don’t believe in a blank check for any country and I don’t believe in tying Israel’s hands with new, additional conditions on military aid. All aid is conditioned,” she said in a statement to POLITICO.

Biss, her chief rival, has expressed openness to placing additional conditions on aid while affirming Israel’s right to exist and citing his own family’s Holocaust history.

Biss, whose allies champion his double-digit polling lead in the sprawling field of candidates, has also drawn criticism for meeting with AIPAC early in the campaign, a move he said wasn’t to solicit money but to be transparent about his views, he said in a column on Substack.

Steve Sheffey, a pro-Israel Democratic activist who supports Biss, agreed with Axelrod’s view that AIPAC’s involvement could cut both ways.

“It’s really a question of whether the money that AIPAC is spending on behalf or in support of Laura Fine will outweigh the negative image that many people have of AIPAC,” he said, adding, that money is good for any campaign, but if voters know it’s from AIPAC, they might pivot to another candidate.

“The positions AIPAC is taking on many issues are out of step with where many Americans and where many Jewish Americans are,” he said. “And to the extent it becomes known that these super PACs that don’t bear AIPAC’s name are associated with AIPAC, that could hurt her.”

At the same time, Sheffey acknowledged the complexity of running against a well-funded outside campaign. “That money’s being spent against him is never good,” Sheffey said of Biss. “But the fact that AIPAC is the entity spending the money could help him, if the word gets out.”

The challenge, says Sheffey, is that “people don’t understand that being pro-Israel is not the same as pro-AIPAC. And pro-Israel is not the same as pro-Netanyahu.”

Voters “who think pro-Israel means supporting the current government of Israel are not going to be crazy about Daniel Biss,” he continued.

But “people who understand that there’s a difference between the state of Israel and the current government of Israel, and that Daniel opposes some of the policies of the state of Israel but supports Israel’s safety and security, recognize that he is the best candidate from that perspective,” he maintained.

Despite the attention from many on AIPAC, former state Sen. Carol Ronen, a local Democratic committeewoman supporting Fine, argued that political action committees’ spending is a broader problem — and faulted the Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United ruling for opening the floodgates to unlimited PAC spending.

“All these super PACs and the billionaire donors, they're all awful. It’s the system that’s the problem, and that’s thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court,” she said.