Washington Watch
This past week, former Ohio State Senator Nina Turner lost her bid to fill the open congressional seat in Ohio’s 11th district. The winner was Shontel Brown, the chair of the Democratic Party in the district’s largest county. What was troubling about this election was the role played by a “dark money” pro-Israel political group that spent almost $2 million to defeat Turner.
Let me be honest right up front and acknowledge that I know and respect Nina Turner. She was a friend to my late wife and me. I’ve worked with her in two presidential campaigns, and we served together as members of the select Democratic Party’s Unity and Reform Commission. I know her to be a passionate champion for universal health care, raising the minimum wage, and challenging racial, social, and political inequities. These were the issues which have defined her career and on which she based her campaign.
Because Turner ran as an unabashedly progressive candidate, the more centrist leadership of the Democratic Party’s establishment coalesced around Shontel Brown. To make the divide even more pronounced, while Brown was endorsed by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Joe Biden’s main 2020 supporter, Congressman James Clyburn, Turner’s campaign won endorsements from Senators Bernie Sanders and Ed Markey, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the group of progressive members of Congress known as “The Squad,” as well as Cleveland’s mayor and its major newspaper.
On one level, the election played out as a classic “progressive versus moderate” battle, but beneath the surface a very different contest was taking place.
Because Nina Turner had criticized Israel’s violations of Palestinian rights and stated that she would support legislation that would condition US aid to Israel based on its human rights behaviour, pro-Israel groups determined that it was imperative that she be beaten.
While this election was, no doubt, a setback to those who seek to create a more level playing field in Congress, it’s not the end of the story. In 2022 there will be more challenges to members of Congress who offer blind support to Israel. And with the tide of public opinion turning and now favoring a more balanced approach toward the Israel-Palestinian conflict, we can expect more challenges to the status quo. Unless there is serious campaign finance reform, there will be more dark money being spent to defeat candidates who argue for a more balanced US policy.
A political action committee, the Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI), the group that has been spearheading the drive to defeat candidates who oppose unconditional support for Israel, sprang into action. Warning of the prospect of electing a dangerous anti-Israel advocate to Congress, it raised well over $3 million in “dark money” to spend in this election— $1.6 million spent on ads against Turner, $0.4 million on ads for Brown, and much of the rest on pro-Brown/anti-Turner mailings, signs, and polling.
[These types of political committees and their expenditures are referred to as “dark money” because while there are legal limits on how much an individual can contribute to a candidate’s campaigns, political groups have no such limits. And unlike campaign contributions which must be reported, monies given to these political committees are not reported. Hence, the designation “dark money.” Investigative reporters have discovered that a great deal of the $3 million raised by DMFI came from corporate executives and even Trump supporters.
The ads that filled the airwaves in the weeks leading up to election day painted Turner as a wild-eyed radical who wasn’t fit to serve in Congress. They questioned whether Turner was a “real Democrat,” whether she would work to support Biden’s agenda, and whether she was committed to universal health care, raising the minimum wage, and working for clean energy— issues that are central to Turner’s life’s work and her campaign.
What was especially troubling about this effort to malign Turner was the disconnect between the way the DMFI raised the money they spent against Turner and the way they ultimately used it. Their fundraising pitches to prospective donors focused on their opposition to Turner’s approach to Israel/Palestine, but they never once mentioned this issue in their paid TV advertisements. Instead, as they have in other campaigns, they focused their ads on defaming Turner.
DMFI went to such drastic lengths in an effort to destroy Turner because it saw this election as a “do or die” contest for supporters of Israel after pro-Israel candidates lost major races in 2020: Jamaal Bowman defeated Congressman Eliot Engel in New York, Marie Newman defeated Congressman Dan Lipinski in Illinois, Cori Bush defeated Congressman William Clay in Missouri. In addition to these defeats, every member of Congress who supported a bill conditioning US aid to Israel won re-election. As a result of these setbacks, the pro-Israel crowd became determined to stop the hemorrhaging of support for Israel out of the fear of losing their well-cultivated myth of invincibility.
But they are swimming against the tide. Among Democrats, public opinion is turning against blind support for Israel. Majorities of Americans now favor conditioning US aid to Israel based on that country’s human rights performance. A recent poll shows that even 59 percent of American Jews feel that way.
Ever since I came to Washington in the 1970s, I have observed how difficult it was to win congressional support for Palestinian rights. At one point, I joked that I wanted to form a club of members of Congress who had told me, “I’m really with you on this, but you know I just can’t say anything public because I want to win re-election.” Congress was haunted by the well-cultivated fear that pro-Israel PACs would gang up to oppose them if they stepped out of line.
As examples, they would point to two “pro-Arab” Republicans: former Senator Charles Percy and Congressman Paul Findley— both of whom lost elections to pro-Israel, well-funded opponents. The main pro-Israel group, at the time, AIPAC, actually boasted: “We beat Percy.” And a pro-Israel senator was known to have corralled colleagues before a vote warning that if they didn’t vote the “right way” they might experience the same fate as Percy.
On closer scrutiny, however, that line just wasn’t true. Percy admitted to me that he lost because the Black vote in Chicago (which he had previously carried) turned against him. And Findley lost primarily because he had been redistricted from a heavily Republican district, to one with a Democratic edge. Still, the myth of the power of the pro-Israel PACs once born, took hold and dominated thinking in Congress for years.
But now, all that is changing. Recognizing this, DFMI put everything it could into defeating Nina Turner and making her an example. This was exactly the argument they made in an email sent to donors the day after the election — in effect, boasting of their “invincibility.”
While this election was, no doubt, a setback to those who seek to create a more level playing field in Congress, it’s not the end of the story. In 2022 there will be more challenges to members of Congress who offer blind support to Israel. And with the tide of public opinion turning and now favoring a more balanced approach toward the Israel-Palestinian conflict, we can expect more challenges to the status quo. Unless there is serious campaign finance reform, there will be more dark money being spent to defeat candidates who argue for a more balanced US policy.
