SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
us house
'AIPAC Getting Desperate’: Pro-Israel Super PAC Tries to Splinter Left Vote in Illinois House Primary
Kat Abughazaleh, the progressive candidate for Illinois' 9th Congressional District, said the Israel lobby's attempt "to split the vote" between progressive candidates "has never been seen before."
Mar 16, 2026
With just days until the Democratic primary for Illinois’ 9th Congressional District, Chicago voters found their social media feeds blanketed with an ad praising a candidate considered well out of the running in Tuesday’s race.
"Bushra Amiwala is the real deal, fighting for real economic justice," concludes the 30-second commercial, which touts the 28-year-old activist's backing of Medicare for All, student loan forgiveness, and other policies aimed at economic justice.
As it came to light that a political action committee associated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was behind the ad, Amiwala said she "could not be more disgusted" by the campaign.
“Let me be clear,” she said. “We don’t want it, we didn’t ask for it, and we’re demanding they stop.”
The ad boosting Amiwala was part of a $100,000 spending blitz by the Chicago Progressive Partnership, which The New York Times describes as "a super PAC that has disclosed few details about its backers but shares vendors with groups linked to [AIPAC]."
The pro-Israel lobbying group is not throwing resources behind Amiwala, a fierce defender of Palestinian rights, to boost her campaign, but to sap the momentum of Kat Abughazaleh, a progressive candidate who has surged to within arm's length of leading the race in the weeks ahead of the March 17 primary.
AIPAC has spent more than $1 million trying to stop Abughazaleh, a 26-year-old Palestinian-American journalist and media analyst, from taking the seat held by the retiring incumbent Rep. Jan Schakowsky, a Democrat.
Abughazaleh, whose grandparents fled Jerusalem during the 1948 Nakba, has called Israel's US-backed military campaign in Gaza a "genocide," and has called for the conditioning of military aid to Israel—including funds for its Iron Dome defense system—on an end to its human rights violations.
She has also opposed laws criminalizing participation in the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which seeks to pressure Israel to change its conduct using economic means.
The most recent poll, from March 9-10, shows Abughazaleh trailing just four points behind frontrunner Daniel Biss, the Democratic mayor of Evanston, Illinois.
Though he recently has described AIPAC as "toxic" and has called for the conditioning of some "offensive" aid to Israel, Biss described BDS as a tactic "used to advance antisemitic ideology" and said he supports the "special relationship" between the US and Israel in a January blog post.
He has accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of creating a "humanitarian catastrophe" in Gaza, but has stopped short of using the word "genocide."
AIPAC, meanwhile, has thrown more than $4.6 million behind an even more pro-Israel candidate, state Sen. Laura Fine (D-9), who during the race has firmly supported full military funding for the country "without additional conditions," even after its military campaign has killed at least 72,000 people in Gaza and independent estimates show even higher death tolls.
Biss has also become a target of $1.5 million in spending from another AIPAC-aligned group, Elect Chicago Women, which has run ads attacking him over a vote to cut Medicaid and for having broken his pledge to serve a full term as mayor before seeking higher office.
The 9th District is one of four Democratic primaries across Illinois where AIPAC and aligned groups have spent more than $15.8 million combined to support pro-Israel candidates, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings analyzed by the group AIPAC Tracker.
Like in Illinois-9, these groups have shied away from making their connections with AIPAC known—as Democratic voters overwhelmingly distrust its branding—and have attacked their opponents on issues not related to Israel and often from the left.
AIPAC has already attempted this tactic in New Jersey's 11th district, where it backfired tremendously last month: Rather than helping a right-wing candidate, the group's attack ads claiming that the liberal Zionist former Rep. Tom Malinowsky supported US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) led votes to flow to Analilia Mejía, a progressive endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) who ultimately emerged victorious.
"Massive outside spending from corporate PACs and groups like AIPAC has long been used to overwhelm grassroots candidates and distort the democratic process, reflecting the priorities of wealthy donors rather than everyday voters," Joseph Geevarghese, the executive director of the progressive group Our Revolution, told Common Dreams. "But recent races show that strategy does not always deliver the results these interests expect. From New Jersey’s 11th district to North Carolina, where Nida Allam came within a fraction of a percent of victory, voters are increasingly questioning the flood of outside money in their elections."
Nevertheless, AIPAC is using the same playbook in Illinois.
Axios noted that last week, the Chicago Progressive Partnership began targeting tech entrepreneur Junaid Ahmed, the Congressional Progressive Caucus and Justice Democrat-backed candidate in Illinois' 8th district, not for his outspoken criticisms of Israel but for his large personal fortune and his investments in Tesla, which it used to tie him to its CEO Elon Musk, a strong supporter of President Donald Trump.
Abughazaleh has been hit with similar attacks claiming she'd received funds from "right-wing donors" and criticizing her support for Republican Marco Rubio in the 2016 presidential election, when she was in high school.
CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 2 DAYS LEFT!!!💥 Endorsed by Rep. Rashida Tlaib!!💥 AIPAC getting desperate!!💥 Doorknocking all over the district!!💥 Phonebanking all afternoon!!💥 Donate at katforillinois.com — we have to buy + print more literature bc we’ve had so many volunteers!!
[image or embed]
— Kat Abughazaleh (@katmabu.bsky.social) March 15, 2026 at 12:21 PM
In the final days of the campaign, Abughazaleh has described AIPAC's tactics against her as a sign of "desperation" in the face of growing "Abughamania."
With Fine largely out of the running, she said the group has pivoted toward "the only horse left they could have in this race: Mayor Daniel Biss."
Abughazaleh described the group's sudden launch of ads supporting Amiwala "to try to split the vote" as something that "has never been seen before."
On Sunday, Abughazaleh won a key endorsement, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian-American in Congress. She also has the backing of another leading progressive figure in Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), as well as the Justice Democrats and the Sunrise Movement.
“AIPAC’s guiding principle when buying elections: Just lie,” said Justice Democrats in response to a report on AIPAC’s tactics to divide left-wing voters. “Spend millions to lie about who you are, lie about who you’re supporting, lie about your agenda. They know that they are so toxic and their policies are so unpopular that being truthful would lose them every election.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Progressives Warn Democrats: Vote for Iran War Powers Resolution or Face Primary Challenge
"Today every House member will go on record and answer: Do they truly oppose endless wars and stand for the Constitution, or were those just empty campaign slogans?" said one group.
Mar 05, 2026
As the US House prepared to vote Thursday on a war powers resolution aimed at ending President Donald Trump's assault on Iran and Democratic leaders whip votes in support of the measure, progressive organizers ramped up pressure on lawmakers to side with the vast majority of the party's voters and support the resolution—or face consequences in upcoming elections.
Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for Justice Democrats, told Axios Wednesday after Senate Republicans—and Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania—voted down a companion resolution, that "any Democrat that votes against war powers is supporting Trump's war on Iran and deserves to be primaried because all voters across the political spectrum are wholeheartedly against it."
A poll released by Reuters/Ipsos this week found that just 25% of voters support Trump's decision to join Israel in launching airstrikes across Iran, which have so far killed more than 1,000 Iranian civilians. At least six US service members have also died or been killed since the unprovoked assault began over the weekend.
Only 7% of Democratic voters support "Operation Epic Fury," as the administration is calling the attacks, while 74% oppose it. A small majority of Republicans, 55%, said they approved of the White House's war on Iran, which the administration has justified with conflicting reasons—none of them convincing experts who say the attacks are a clear violation of international law.
After warning that "the American people will remember who voted to keep our service members in danger by supporting this dangerous, unnecessary, unpopular war" following the Senate vote on Wednesday, the advocacy group Demand Progress urged Americans to call their representatives in Congress and demand they support the war powers resolution introduced in the House by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.).
The measure is expected to fail due to the GOP majority; Republicans hold 218 seats in the House while Democrats control 214; Massie and one other Republican, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), have indicated support.
Groups are "organizing calls into their districts to make sure that every Democrat votes for" the bipartisan resolution, one House progressive told the outlet.
Organizers are directing particular ire at House Democrats who have a history of staunchly backing Israel and have unveiled a resolution that would allow Trump to continue striking Iran for 30 days.
That resolution was introduced by Reps. Josh Gottheimer (NJ), Jim Costa (Calif.), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Jared Golden (Maine), Greg Landsman (Ohio), and Jimmy Panetta (Calif.) and would authorize the attacks for roughly the same length of time the president has said he believes they'll last, although Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the war could take twice as long and that, ultimately, there would be no timeline placed on the war.
Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser for Demand Progress, told The Intercept Wednesday that for "any representative that is actually against the war," the resolution introduced by Khanna and Massie is "the vehicle they should be voting for now, and not attempting to give Trump a blank check for 30 days."
“We have already seen in the past four days the death and destruction and escalation with this war. I can’t even imagine what things look like in 30 days," said Kharrazian.
Golden is not seeking reelection this year; the other five co-sponsors of the alternative war powers resolution are up for reelection and facing primaries in the coming months.
Axios asked other lawmakers including Reps. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) how they plan to vote on Khanna and Massie's resolution, but did not receive clear answers, with Suozzi saying only that he was "going to do the right thing."
Moskowitz told The Hill that he has "decided" how he'll vote but is "not ready to say what my vote is."
Oliver Larkin, a democratic socialist running against Moskowitz in the primary, seized on the congressman's comment.
Britt Jacovich, a spokesperson for the grassroots advocacy group MoveOn, told Axios that the organization's members "have no plans to throw their support behind members of Congress who refused to do their job and stop Trump from expanding his war. All options are on the table to make sure that our members' voices are heard loud and clear."
MoveOn also said Wednesday that any lawmaker who supports a $50 billion supplemental funding package "should expect to hear from our members."
"MoveOn members consider a vote for the supplemental a vote in favor of Donald Trump's war," said the group.
In a private Democratic caucus meeting on Wednesday, Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member, and Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), made an "emphatic" case for Khanna and Massie's resolution, and House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) has been leading efforts to whip votes.
One anonymous progressive House Democrat told Axios that a vote against the resolution would be "politically perilous" for any Democrat.
Advocacy groups are "already preparing" to organize primary challenges against Democrats who break ranks or vote to allow Trump to attack Iran for a 30-day window, said the lawmaker.
"If the filing deadline has passed, they'll do it in '28," they told Axios. "It's basically inviting a primary challenge."
Paco Fabian, a spokesperson for Our Revolution, told Axios that "when elected officials... fail to stand with working people demanding peace and accountability, they risk losing the trust of the voters who put them in office."
"And when that trust is broken," he said, "voters often begin looking for leaders who will fight for them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Billionaires Are Trying to Defeat Rep. John Larson—Social Security’s No. 1 Champion
The uber wealthy hate the Social Security 2100 Act—and the man who wrote it. That’s why they are backing Rep. Larson’s primary challenger, corporate lawyer Luke Bronin.
Jan 30, 2026
Democratic Rep. John Larson of Connecticut is an irreplaceable leader in the fight to expand Social Security. As the top Democrat on the Social Security subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee, he combines deep policy expertise with passionate advocacy for Social Security’s 67 million beneficiaries and its 185 million contributors.
Rep. Larson’s signature legislation, the Social Security 2100 Act, would increase Social Security’s modest benefits for everyone. It also includes additional targeted increases for the most vulnerable. And it is paid for by requiring millionaires and billionaires, who currently stop paying into Social Security after their first $184,500 in income, to finally pay their fair share.
Not surprisingly, billionaires hate the Social Security 2100 Act—and the man who wrote it. That’s why they are backing Rep. Larson’s primary challenger, corporate lawyer Luke Bronin. Hidden behind shadowy outside groups, they plan to pour enormous sums into the race.
These billionaires know that the clock is ticking. The Social Security 2100 Act has support from nearly 90% of House Democrats. Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) has pledged that if Democrats take back the House this November, they will hold a vote on the bill—setting the stage for it to become law the next time there is a Democratic trifecta.
Bronin and his Wall Street buddies can’t understand the fear felt by millions of Americans who don’t know how secure our Social Security is, with billionaires like Elon Musk buying political power to try to demolish the system brick by brick.
Thanks to Rep. Larson’s leadership, we are closer than ever to expanding Social Security. It’s no accident that the Social Security 2100 Act has such widespread support among the entire Democratic caucus, including both progressives and moderates. Rep. Larson made that happen by appealing to his colleagues in person at every opportunity—the type of work many members of Congress leave to their staff.
Rep. Larson is legendary for his tenacity. When Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) was first elected to Congress, she was shunned by Democratic leadership and many of her Democratic colleagues. Not Rep. Larson. He immediately went to her office and asked for her support for the 2100 Act. In fact, I was called by her staffer, who asked me who the guy patiently waiting in her office with a folder for her explaining Social Security expansion was.
Rep. Larson works this tirelessly to educate every member of the caucus about Social Security expansion. AOC signed on—and recorded a video with Rep. Larson about their mutual support for Social Security.
Wall Street and its billionaires know that their best shot at stopping Social Security expansion is to take out Rep. Larson. That’s why they are uniting behind Bronin.
Rep. Larson grew up in a public housing project. He went to state university and then worked as a history teacher. In contrast, Bronin went to a fancy prep school and Yale University. He then worked in corporate law and focused on opportunistically climbing the political ladder.
Bronin was elected mayor of Hartford in 2015, on a pledge to serve out his full term. Bronin broke that pledge to unsuccessfully run for governor of Connecticut two years later. At the time, the Connecticut Mirror reported that “even admirers of Bronin, most of whom declined to be quoted by name, said he risked being seen as an opportunist, someone more interested in advancement than completing a difficult job.”
That’s exactly what Wall Street is looking for, and has found in Luke Bronin—someone who wants power for its own sake, and is happy to carry out its preferred agenda. Wall Street wants to deprive Social Security of its greatest champion in the US House, and Bronin is its weapon of choice.
Tellingly, Bronin attacks Rep. Larson for fighting too hard for Social Security. I think that is because Bronin and his Wall Street buddies can’t understand what life is like for the 154,216 residents of Connecticut’s First Congressional district and the 67 million Americans around the country who rely on Social Security to live their lives independently and with dignity.
Bronin and his Wall Street buddies can’t understand the fear felt by millions of Americans who don’t know how secure our Social Security is, with billionaires like Elon Musk buying political power to try to demolish the system brick by brick. President Donald Trump and Musk have closed offices, broken the phones, and most destructively fired thousands of workers needed to keep the system functioning. Larson has been fighting against that destruction and shined a spotlight on it. Social Security is in the greatest danger in its 90 year history, and it is because of Wall Street and its billionaires.
More than ever, we need Rep. Larson leading the fight to protect and expand Social Security.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular