House of Representatives

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Mike Johnson scraps vote on funding bill after Republicans signal opposition

      by

      The House Republican speaker, Mike Johnson, hastily scrapped a planned vote on his government funding package on Wednesday after at least eight members of his own conference signaled opposition to the plan, raising more questions about how Congress will avert a partial shutdown before the end of the month.Johnson had combined a six-month stopgap funding bill with the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (Save) Act, a controversial proposal that would require people to show proof of citizenship when they register to vote.Donald Trump had already further complicated Johnson’s efforts by insisting on Tuesday that Republicans should not pass any government funding bill without addressing “election security”, as he leveled baseless accusations against Democrats of “trying to ‘stuff’ voter registrations with illegal aliens”.Johnson acknowledged he did not have enough support to pass the bill, given that he could only afford four defections within his conference if every House Democrat opposed the plan. Johnson told reporters on Capitol Hill that he and his team would work through the weekend to reach an agreement on funding the government.“No vote today because we’re in the consensus-building business here in Congress. With small majorities, that’s what you do,” Johnson said. “We’re having thoughtful conversations, family conversations within the Republican conference, and I believe we’ll get there.”Johnson’s bill would have extended government funding until 28 March, more than two months after the new president takes office in January. If Congress does not take action on federal funding this month, the government could partially shut down starting 1 October.Despite the lack of appetite for a government shutdown so close to election day on 5 November, Democrats and some Republicans balked at Johnson’s proposal. Democrats largely oppose the Save Act, which Republicans claim is necessary to prevent noncitizens from casting ballots. Critics of the Save Act note that it is already illegal for noncitizens to vote, and they warn that the policy could prevent valid voters from casting their ballots. The House passed the Save Act in July, but Senate Democrats have shown no interest in advancing the bill.In a “Dear Colleague” letter sent on Monday, the House Democratic leader, Hakeem Jeffries, condemned Johnson’s proposal as “unserious and unacceptable”. He called on Congress to pass a stopgap bill, known as a continuing resolution, that would keep the government funded past election day and allow lawmakers to pass a full-year spending package before the new year.“In order to avert a GOP-driven government shutdown that will hurt everyday Americans, Congress must pass a short-term continuing resolution that will permit us to complete the appropriations process during this calendar year and is free of partisan policy changes inspired by Trump’s Project 2025,” Jeffries said. “There is no other viable path forward that protects the health, safety and economic wellbeing of hardworking American taxpayers.”Even among fellow Republicans, Johnson had encountered resistance. At least eight Republicans had indicated they would oppose the bill, complaining that it did not do enough to cut government spending. Thomas Massie, a Republican congressman `of Kentucky who has repeatedly clashed with Johnson, mocked the speaker’s proposal as “an insult to Americans’ intelligence”.“The [continuing resolution] doesn’t cut spending, and the shiny object attached to it will be dropped like a hot potato before passage,” Massie said on Monday.Johnson had simultaneously fielded criticism from the congressman Mike Rogers, the Republican chair of the House armed services committee, who expressed concern about how the stopgap bill might affect military readiness. The defense secretary, Lloyd Austin, has described passing a full-year spending bill for the Pentagon as “the single most important thing that Congress can do to ensure US national security”.Johnson will now confer with fellow House Republicans to try to cobble together a majority, but even if he does manage to drag his bill across the finish line, the proposal has virtually no chance of passage in the Democratic-controlled Senate.In his own “Dear Colleague” letter sent on Sunday, the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, suggested that Democrats would only pass a clean funding bill with no “poison pills” attached.“As I have said before, the only way to get things done is in a bipartisan way,” Schumer said. “Despite Republican bluster, that is how we’ve handled every funding bill in the past, and this time should be no exception. We will not let poison pills or Republican extremism put funding for critical programs at risk.”Trump’s ultimatum, meanwhile, could put Johnson in a bind, and it increases the risk of a partial government shutdown taking effect just weeks before Americans go to the polls.Trump said on Tuesday on his social media platform, Truth Social: “If Republicans in the House, and Senate, don’t get absolute assurances on Election Security, THEY SHOULD, IN NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, GO FORWARD WITH A CONTINUING RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET.” More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Lawyer Wins Democratic Primary in New Hampshire’s Second District

      by

      Maggie Goodlander, who has deep Washington ties, edged out Colin Van Ostern, who unsuccessfully ran for New Hampshire governor in 2016.Maggie Goodlander, a former Justice Department official and political newcomer, won the Democratic primary for New Hampshire’s Second Congressional District on Tuesday after a close race against Colin Van Ostern, according to The Associated Press.Ms. Goodlander, who grew up in Nashua, N.H., but spent most of her adult life elsewhere, is married to Jake Sullivan, President Biden’s national security adviser. She had won about 62 percent of the vote as of 8:45 p.m., edging out Mr. Van Ostern, who unsuccessfully ran for governor in 2016 and spent several years on the New Hampshire Executive Council.The contest became unexpectedly nasty when Mr. Van Ostern, 45, a California native, accused Ms. Goodlander, 37, of exaggerating her ties to the state and questioned her support for abortion rights. A few of his high-profile supporters defected after he ran an ad casting doubt on the sincerity of Ms. Goodlander’s commitment to reproductive rights, citing her past donations to two Republican candidates.Ms. Goodlander has spoken openly of her own struggle to find timely reproductive health care when her fetus was diagnosed with a fatal condition and died in her womb. She has described that experience as one that led her to seek public office.The Democratic tilt in the district, which stretches from the state’s southern border to its northernmost tip, and includes New Hampshire’s capital, Concord, gives Ms. Goodlander an advantage heading into the general election in November. The seat is being vacated by Representative Annie Kuster, a Democrat who is retiring; she endorsed Mr. Van Ostern, her one-time campaign manager.More than a dozen candidates vied for the Republican nomination; Lily Tang Wiliams came out on top, according to The Associated Press, and will face Ms. Goodlander in November.Ms. Goodlander had been depicted by detractors, including Ms. Kuster, as a well-connected Washington insider who described herself as “a renter” despite owning a $1.2 million home in Portsmouth, N.H., with her husband. Her critics had emphasized that most of her donations came from out of state, including from a number of Washington power players, and accused her of trying “to buy a seat in Congress.”Her résumé includes stints as an intelligence officer in the Naval Reserve, a Senate foreign policy adviser, a Supreme Court clerk and a deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department.She was also born into a well-known Republican political family. Her mother, Betty Tamposi, served as a Republican in the State House of Representatives and ran for Congress in the same district that gave her daughter the nod on Tuesday.“She didn’t win, but she learned a valuable lesson that she passed down to me: Always stand up to bullies,” Ms. Goodlander said of her mother in a campaign video, adding, “The fact is, the bullies have too much power in America right now.” More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Johnson’s Spending Plan Falters, Facing Resistance From Both Parties

      by

      The speaker’s first effort to avert a government shutdown ran into a buzz saw of opposition from both far-right and mainstream Republicans.Speaker Mike Johnson’s initial plan to avert a government shutdown has run into a wall of Republican opposition, as lawmakers from an array of factions in his party balk at a six-month stopgap funding measure that Democrats have already rejected.Mr. Johnson has said he plans to bring up a spending bill this week that would extend federal funding through March 28, which includes a measure that would require proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote. The addition of the voting restriction bill was a nod to the right flank of his conference and an effort to force politically vulnerable Democrats to take a fraught vote.But his $1.6 trillion proposal was almost immediately met with an outpouring of skepticism by House Republicans on Monday evening as they returned to Washington after a lengthy summer recess. Hard-line conservatives, including Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky, said they would oppose the legislation because it would extend current spending levels they believe are too high.The legislation “doesn’t cut spending, and the shiny object attached to it will be dropped like a hot potato before passage,” Mr. Massie said, referring to the voting restriction. He added: “I refuse to be a thespian in this failure theater.”On the other hand, Republican defense hawks, including Representative Mike D. Rogers of Alabama, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said they opposed the plan because extending current spending levels for such a lengthy period would amount to a cut to military spending, which would otherwise be slated to increase in the coming months.The internal divisions were the latest headache for Mr. Johnson in a seemingly interminable series of skirmishes over government funding that have dogged him since Republicans took control of the House. Every episode has ended with the same result: passage of a bipartisan spending bill that has angered the right flank of the House Republican conference.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      US House clashes over Harris’s role in 2021 Afghanistan troop withdrawal

      by

      Partisan divisions over the chaotic 2021 pullout of western forces from Afghanistan have burst into the open ahead of Tuesday’s presidential debate in Philadelphia after a Republican-led congressional report attempted to implicate Kamala Harris in the episode.A 250-page report from the House of Representatives’ foreign affairs committee castigated the Biden administration for failing to anticipate the Taliban’s rapid takeover and neglecting to prepare for the orderly departure of non-combatant personnel.The decision led to a shambolic evacuation effort and numerous American civilians and US-allied Afghans being left stranded as the country fell to hardline Islamist forces that America and its Nato allies had spent 20 years trying to defeat.The report, written by the committee’s Republican chairman, Michael McCaul, zeroes in on the supposed role played by the US vice-president – mentioning her name 251 times, although no evidence has emerged that she was directly involved in the decisions leading to one of the most damaging foreign policy chapters of Joe Biden’s presidency.By contrast, a 115-page interim report issued by McCaul on the committee’s investigation on 2022 name-checked Harris just twice.Democrats seized on the contrast, accusing McCaul of inflating Harris’s part in the incident simply because she had replaced Biden as the party’s presidential nominee.“Vice President Kamala Harris was the last person in the room when President Biden made the decision to withdraw all US forces from Afghanistan; a fact she boasted about shortly after President Biden issued his go-to-zero order,” states the latest report, titled Wilful Blindness: An assessment of the Biden-Harris administration’s withdrawal from Afghanistan and the chaos that followed.The report’s front page carries a picture of Harris prominently displayed below that of Biden, and above an image of Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, who played a more prominent role in the withdrawal.“Despite warnings against withdrawing by senior leaders, Vice President Harris’ aide disclosed the vice president ‘strongly supported’ President Biden’s decision,” McCaul’s report goes on. “President Biden’s former Chief of Staff Ron Klain affirmed Vice President Harris was entrenched in the president’s Afghanistan policy.”Democrats accused the Republicans of trying to exploit the withdrawal for election purposes while overlooking the fact that the party’s presidential nominee, Donald Trump, took the original decision to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan when he was president.“Republicans now claim [Harris] was the architect of the US withdrawal though she is referenced only three times in 3,288 pages of the Committee’s interview transcripts,” wrote Gregory Meeks, the Democrats’ ranking member on the committee in a 59-page rebuttal to McCaul’s report.Harris’s alleged role in the withdrawal seems likely to arise when she meets Trump for their only scheduled televised debate in Philadelphia on Tuesday.Sharon Yan, a spokesperson for the White House national security council, said the the report was “based on cherry-picked facts, inaccurate characterizations and pre-existing biases”.She added: “Ending our longest war was the right thing to do and our nation is stronger today as a result.”Harris’s campaign has tried to promote her role in Biden’s foreign policy decisions since she replaced at the top of the Democratic ticket. But she has said little about the Afghan withdrawal. The House report notes that she was on a trip to Singapore and Vietnam at the time and publicly pledged that the administration would protect Afghan women and children.It concludes: “Her promise has clearly not been fulfilled.”Democrats’ accusation of using the Afghan pull-out for campaign purposes echoes criticisms of Trump’s now notorious visit to Arlington national cemetery last month to mark the third anniversary of the event.The former US president’s campaign was rebuked by the US army after its staffers reportedly became embroiled in a confrontation with a cemetery worker when she tried to enforce rules against filming and photographing in a section reserved for service members killed in the Afghan and Iraqi conflicts.Pictures and footage subsequently emerged of Trump posing at the graveside of personnel killed in a suicide bombing at Abbey Gate, near Kabul airport – which resulted in the deaths of 13 US personnel and roughly 170 Afghans. Trump denied that his visit was a campaign event, pointing out that he had been invited by families of the fallen servicemen. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Republican-led House panel subpoenas Tim Walz over $250m Covid relief fraud

      by

      A Republican-led US House committee sent a subpoena to Minnesota’s governor, Tim Walz, seeking documents and communications related to a vast fraud scheme conducted by a non-profit that used pandemic relief funds meant for feeding kids.NBC News first reported the subpoenas, which were sent to Walz; Minnesota’s commissioner of education, Willie Jett; the US agriculture secretary, Tom Vilsack; and the agriculture inspector general, Phyllis Fong.The US House committee on education and the workforce wrote to Walz, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, to say it had been investigating the US Department of Agriculture and the Minnesota department of education’s oversight of federal child nutrition programs and Feeding Our Future, the group that is alleged to have stolen more than $250m in pandemic funds.The subpoena does not seek an in-person appearance from Walz before the committee. It sets an 18 September deadline for turning over documents.Five of the people involved in the scheme were convicted for their roles earlier this year in a trial that included an attempt to bribe a juror with a bag full of $120,000 in cash left at her home. In total, 70 people have been charged in relation to the scheme.Walz’s increased prominence in national politics has brought fresh scrutiny of his role as Minnesota’s top executive and whether the state education department, which is under his purview, should have caught the fraud.The committee’s Republican chairwoman, Virginia Foxx, wrote to Walz: “You are well aware of the multimillion-dollar fraud that has occurred under your tenure as governor.”A spokesperson for Walz said the Feeding our Future case was “an appalling abuse of a federal Covid-era program”.“The state department of education worked diligently to stop the fraud and we’re grateful to the FBI for working with the Department of Education to arrest and charge the individuals involved,” the spokesperson said.Walz has previously defended the department but acknowledged there were improvements to be made in oversight, after a state audit found the department’s lacking oversight “created opportunities for fraud”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“There’s not a single state employee that was implicated in doing anything that was illegal. They simply didn’t do as much due diligence as they should’ve,” Walz said after the audit report.Foxx claimed the committee had made voluntary requests to Minnesota’s education department for documents but “has been unable to obtain substantive responsive materials”.Walz’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      George Santos Is Expected to Plead Guilty, People Close to Case Say

      by

      Mr. Santos could change his mind, but witnesses in his campaign fraud case were told by federal prosecutors that he intends to plead guilty on Monday.George Santos, the former Republican congressman from New York undone by a mind-bending array of biographical lies and moneymaking schemes, has told prosecutors that he intends to plead guilty and avoid a federal trial that was expected to begin next month, according to two lawyers involved in the case and two other people with knowledge of the matter.The plea, which is expected to occur on Monday in Federal District Court in Central Islip, N.Y., would spare Mr. Santos from a trial that almost certainly would have been a colorful spectacle. Mr. Santos, whose trial on 23 felony charges was scheduled to begin on Sept. 9, could still change his mind. But this week, two lawyers representing multiple witnesses in the case were told by federal prosecutors that Mr. Santos had decided to plead guilty.Two others with knowledge of the plans confirmed that he intends to plead guilty on Monday; one of the people said Mr. Santos is expected to give a statement in court acknowledging his crimes. The terms of his expected guilty plea and what sentence he might face were not clear.Lies, Charges and Questions Left in the George Santos ScandalGeorge Santos, who was expelled from Congress in 2023, has told so many stories they can be hard to keep straight. We cataloged them, including major questions about his personal finances and his campaign fund-raising and spending.Public court records show that an in-person hearing has been scheduled for Monday afternoon at the request of prosecutors and Mr. Santos’s lawyers. The records did not explain the purpose of the hearing. Mr. Santos and one of his lawyers, Joseph Murray, did not respond to requests for comment.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      George Santos expected to plead guilty in fraud case on Monday – reports

      by

      The disgraced former New York Republican congressman George Santos is expected to plead guilty on Monday in a deal with prosecutors on charges that he defrauded his campaign during his 2022 midterm elections, according to multiple reports.Hints of a plea agreement came on Friday ahead of Santos’s federal criminal trial, which was set to start early next month. Prosecutors and defense attorneys suddenly scheduled a hearing without explicitly saying why.Multiple donors to Santos’s previous election campaign told Talking Points Memo that they had been informed that a plea deal would be announced on Monday. TPM was the first outlet to report on alleged fraud by Santos involving the diversion of campaign funds for personal spending.Santos’s attorney, Joe Murray, and the US attorney for the eastern district of New York, the federal prosecuting body with jurisdiction over the case, did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Saturday.The former Republican congressman, a political unknown who flipped a key New York Democratic district stronghold in 2022, drew headlines after it was revealed that much of his résumé had been elaborately fabricated.Despite this, Republican leadership in the House spent months standing by him. He was finally expelled in December 2023, less than a year after being sworn in to Congress. The Democrat Tom Suozzi won the special election to fill the vacated seat.Santos, 36, a first-generation Brazilian American, had run as a member of a “new generation of Republican leadership” and as the “full embodiment of the American dream”.He falsely claimed to have graduated from a New York college, worked at a major New York bank and run a pet rescue charity, and that his family owned a portfolio of 13 properties and that his mother had been at the World Trade Center when it was attacked by hijackers on 11 September 2001.The holes in Santos’s story soon came to wide attention and he was ultimately indicted on 23 charges that included allegations of lying to Congress and spending campaign funds on luxuries including trips to casinos, Ferragamo shoes, Botox treatments and OnlyFans payments. He had pleaded not guilty and seemed to revel in proclaiming his innocence to a scrum of reporters outside court.A scathing House ethics committee report on Santos’s conduct said he “was frequently in debt, had an abysmal credit score, and relied on an ever-growing wallet of high-interest credit cards to fund his luxury spending habits” and had “made over $240,000 cash withdrawals for unknown purposes”.After leaving Congress, Santos began a sideline career as a Cameo performer, posting greetings to paying customers. It was success, at least briefly, with Santos earning more than he had as a US congressman.He also attempted a congressional comeback, this time as an independent candidate, but that effort quickly fizzled.If a plea deal emerges next week, it will follow a similar agreement with Santos’s campaign fundraiser, Sam Miele, who pleaded guilty to federal fraud charges last year, and that of his former campaign treasurer Nancy Marks. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Five things we learned from our reporting on the US’s pro-Israel lobby

      by

      The progressive US representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota easily overcame a primary challenge on Tuesday, delivering a major victory for progressives after a primary season marked by mixed success amid an onslaught of spending from pro-Israel lobby groups.The progressive “Squad” in the House were early to embrace calls for a ceasefire in Gaza and criticize Israel’s offensive for its toll on civilians, drawing the ire of groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac). Omar and Summer Lee of Pennsylvania were still able to easily cruise to victory in their primaries, but pro-Israel groups successfully picked off its two biggest Squad targets of this primary season: Jamaal Bowman of New York and Cori Bush of Missouri.The Guardian followed key congressional races affected by Aipac and similar groups for the past few months. With the primaries coming to a close, here’s what we learned about the pro-Israel lobby’s efforts this year.1Aipac is spending more as public opinion on Israel shiftsThe $23m Aipac pumped into defeating just two members of Congress can be seen as evidence of the depth of the pro-Israel lobby’s concern that public opinion is shifting away from decades of largely unquestioning support for Israel as the US’s “greatest ally”, particularly among young Americans. These shifts in public opinion threaten the claims of a bipartisan consensus on support for Israel in Congress.Aipac’s creation of the United Democracy Project (UDP) political action committee in 2021 to directly intervene in election campaigns for the first time was in part a response to opinion polls showing that even before the present war in Gaza, half of Democrats wanted the US to give more support to Palestinians.The group pledged to spend $100m this election year; it has so far spent more than $90m. Bowman and Bush’s races were the two most expensive House primaries in history, according to the firm AdImpact.Bowman and Bush were elected to Congress on the back of the Black Lives Matter movement, which has focused on reframing the Palestinian cause as a civil rights issue of resistance to Israeli domination. The shift in narrative alarms Aipac, as has the impact of international court rulings against Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories and a growing consensus within international human rights organisations that Israel imposes a form of apartheid on Palestinians.The war in Gaza, where Israel has killed at least 40,000 Palestinians, a majority of them civilians, has only added to the challenges now facing the pro-Israel lobby, with a third of Democrats saying Biden has not been “tough enough”with Israel.2Pro-Israel groups spent big to pick off vulnerable incumbentsAipac’s UDP spent $14.6m in its campaign to unseat Bowman. The group Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI) spent another $1m to help George Latimer, the Westchester county executive, win the Democratic nomination.In Bush’s primary, UDP spent $8.6m to promote the campaign of Wesley Bell, a St Louis prosecutor, and DMFI contributed close to $500,000 to the effort.View image in fullscreenThe financial commitment paid off, as both Bowman and Bush went on to lose their primaries. But it’s worth noting that Bowman and Bush were already viewed as more vulnerable than some of their other Squad colleagues at the start of the primary season.Bowman had attracted negative headlines last year for pulling a fire alarm in the Capitol during a crucial vote, an incident that prompted a misdemeanor charge and a formal House censure. Bowman also had to apologize in January for writing some now-deleted blogposts promoting conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks, and Latimer was helped by redistricting, which brought more of the suburban voters inclined to support him to the district. Meanwhile, the justice department is investigating Bush’s spending on security services, after she married her security guard and kept him on her campaign payroll. View image in fullscreenGroups like UDP and DMFI chose to focus their attention on lawmakers who already had some kind of baggage heading into their primaries.3Pro-Israel groups stayed out of races they deemed unwinnableMany election watchers expected Lee’s primary in Pennsylvania to be the first test of the pro-Israel lobby’s strength against the Squad, but UDP and DMFI chose to stay out of the race.The decision came as somewhat of a surprise, as UDP and DMFI collectively spent nearly $4.4m against Lee when she first ran for Congress in 2022. But the groups opted out of the race this year after Lee spent her first term in Congress building goodwill with her constituents and delivering more than $1.2bn in funding for her district.View image in fullscreenThe Super Pac Moderate Pac, backed by the Republican mega-donor Jeffrey Yass, did get involved in Lee’s race, but it was not enough to prevent her victory. Lee ultimately defeated her opponent, local council member Bhavini Patel, by 21 points.A similar pattern played out with Omar. She beat Don Samuels, a former Minneapolis city council member, by 13 points on Tuesday after pro-Israel groups chose to stay out of the race. The progressive representative Rashida Tlaib, the only Palestinian American member of the House and one of the most vocal ceasefire supporters, did not even draw a primary challenger.In races where they did not think they could win, pro-Israel groups simply opted out altogether.4The pro-Israel lobby’s messaging didn’t focus on the war in GazaAlthough pro-Israel groups targeted pro-ceasefire members, their attack ads generally did not focus on the war in Gaza. That choice was strategic, as polls show that an overwhelming majority of Democrats support calls for a ceasefire.Instead, ads from UDP tried to paint members like Bowman and Bush as uncooperative Democrats sowing discord within the party and more focused on their national profiles than their districts. One UDP attack ad against Bowman specifically called out his votes against the bipartisan infrastructure bill and the debt ceiling agreement, mirroring the group’s later attacks against Bush.View image in fullscreen“Jamaal Bowman has his own agenda and refuses to compromise, even with President Biden,” the ad’s narrator says. “Jamaal Bowman has his own agenda, and it’s hurting New York.”That strategy, powered by millions of dollars in ad spending, paid off.5Battle-tested progressives performed betterOmar knew to expect a significant primary challenge this year because she won her 2022 primary against Samuels by just 2 points. This time around, Omar was prepared. She raised roughly five times as much money as Samuels did, and she deployed ads early as a sort of prebuttal against potential attacks on her voting record.Lee similarly secured the narrowest possible victory in her 2022 primary, winning by less than 1 point. Two years later, her margin of victory in the primary had grown by 20 points.View image in fullscreenBowman and Bush were less tested, however. In 2022, Bowman won his primary by 29 points, although he tellingly secured only 54% of the total vote. Bush easily won her primary in 2022, beating her opponent by 43 points and securing 70% of the total vote.This year, it seems that progressives who experienced tougher primary fights in 2022 were better equipped to defend themselves when needed.But Aipac is not only taking aim at Israel’s most strident critics. The millions of dollars poured into defeating Bush and Bowman are a warning shot to other members of Congress and contenders that vocal criticism of Israel or support for Palestinians may come at a political price.Read more of our coverage:

      Pro-Israel money pours in to unseat progressives in congressional races

      Pro-Israel US groups plan $100m effort to unseat progressives over Gaza

      A progressive congresswoman made history in 2022. Can a billionaire stop
      her re-election?

      Pro-Israel groups target Republican House candidate they deem antisemitic

      Pro-Israel groups have set sights on unseating this progressive lawmaker. Will they succeed?

      Race to unseat New York progressive ‘most expensive House primary ever’

      Pro-Israel Pac pours millions into surprise candidate in Maryland primary

      Pro-Israel group pours millions into unseating New York progressive Jamaal Bowman More