Campaign finance disclosures released over the weekend provide a clearer picture of the millions of dollars pro-Israel PACs United Democracy Project (an affiliate of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC) and Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI) have spent thus far in the midterm primaries, and the lengths to which they have gone to hide their true influence.
In 2026, more than 1 out of every 4 dollars in independent expenditures that the two groups have disbursed—almost $8 million out of a total of $30.66 million—have been funneled to nine different partners and shell PACs. Those numbers are likely higher, since the disclosures made to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) only go through the end of May, and they do not count possible outlays to dark-money PACs that do not have to disclose their spending.
Most of the transfers were disclosed only after voting concluded in the primary races, meaning that voters never got a chance to learn who was funding ads that could have influenced their vote. Despite the name Democratic Majority for Israel and AIPAC’s sloganeering that “being pro-Israel is good policy and good politics,” the two PACs repeatedly conceal their funding, knowing that after the genocide in Gaza and the disastrous lost war in Iran, their support can be toxic, particularly in Democratic primaries.
“Any group that is willing to be used as a shell PAC for AIPAC should be ostracized from Democratic politics—this is what makes Democratic voters disillusioned with the party,” said Usamah Andrabi of Justice Democrats, one of the progressive campaign organizations that has responded to pro-Israel PAC spending this year.
Spokespeople for the PACs did not respond to a request for comment.
IT HAS ALREADY BEEN WELL DOCUMENTED, including at the Prospect, that pro-Israel groups were routing campaign cash through anodyne-sounding pop-up shell PACs like “Elect Chicago Women” or “Affordable Chicago Now,” which received $5.3 million from United Democracy Project back in February for four races in Illinois, which resulted in two wins and two losses. That tactic, designed to confuse voters about who is behind the groundswell of support for certain candidates, has continued.
But the new disclosures reveal how the groups are also transferring money to longtime PACs with historic ties to the Democratic establishment and center-left coalitions in Congress.
Recipients in May include Women Vote, the independent expenditure arm of the pro-choice women’s PAC EMILYs List, which often aligns with the favored candidates of Democratic leadership. DMFI gave Women Vote $500,000 on May 13, according to an FEC disclosure. Only three Women Vote independent expenditure campaigns came after that date: Marni von Wilpert in CA-48, Shannon Bird in CO-08, and a thus far token amount to Kaela Jo Berg in MN-02. Von Wilpert won her primary; the other two races have yet to be decided. (DMFI has endorsed an opponent of Berg’s in the MN-02 race.)
Separately, Blue Dog Action PAC, associated with the Blue Dog Coalition, the conservative wing of the party in Congress, received $75,000 from DMFI.
EDW Action Fund, which has an affiliated PAC called Pro-Choice Majority Action, got $750,000 from United Democracy Project in May, after a $250,000 infusion in April. (DMFI also made in-kind donations in the form of polling for EDW in April, totaling $37,750.) These four super PACs have endorsed 16 different candidates throughout this election cycle, eight of whom advanced through their primaries, five of whom lost, and three whose primaries are yet to come. (See the list at the bottom of this story.)
In a statement to the Prospect, a spokesperson from EMILYs List said, “In every race where Women Vote is engaged, we work alongside the coalition supporting our endorsed candidate to execute the most strategic and effective paid program possible.”
EMILYs List, EDW, and/or Pro-Choice Majority Action have supported the same candidates in several races this cycle, including Denise Powell in an Omaha, Nebraska, swing district (NE-02). In that race, DMFI was actually spending its own money on ads until it learned that Powell had publicly rejected support from pro-Israel groups; it then pulled the ads and New Democrat Majority PAC boosted theirs by the same dollar amount. (A few ads from DMFI weren’t pulled in time; officially, it spent $659 on the race.) There is no record of New Democrat Majority, the super PAC of the other main center-left coalition in Congress, receiving money from DMFI or United Democracy Project.
Last Thursday, Pro-Choice Majority Action began running ads in support of 30-year incumbent Rep. Diana DeGette (CO-01), who is facing a robust challenge from democratic socialist Melat Kiros. A poll released last Friday shows Kiros ahead; the election is June 30. Other, lesser-known super PACs are backing DeGette as well.
The associations between pro-Israel PACs and PACs in line with the Democratic establishment and certain congressional coalitions suggest that the battle is not simply about Israel-Palestine policy, but a factional fight determined to keep progressive candidates out of Congress, and boost centrists from the conservative wing of the party.
During the Powell race, Lenny Young, an adviser to Pro-Choice Majority Action, told the Prospect that there was no story in PACs sharing money and bundling support. “There is a lot of symmetry between EDW AF and PCM26, and other Democratic funders, since over half of the Red to Blue and Frontline candidates are women,” he wrote. “We support all of them, and other major Democratic funders will be supporting all of the candidates we support in some configuration or another.”
When asked how he knew who major Democratic funders would support, he replied, “We support all women, EMILYs List supports all women. We’re obviously going to be supporting the same candidates on many different races.” The Prospect had never brought up EMILYs List. When asked how PACs and funders coordinate to decide on specific candidates, Young announced he would only speak off the record.
In late May, Young disputed that the $250,000 EDW received from United Democracy Project was earmarked to support Jasmeet Bains, running in a California Central Valley swing seat (CA-22). When asked multiple times whom pro-Israel PAC money EDW has received was earmarked for, he didn’t respond.
PRO-ISRAEL PACS HAVE ALSO CONTINUED the trend started in Illinois of funding pop-up super PACs that support specific candidates. United for Progress, which is supporting Rep. Adriano Espaillat in New York’s 13th Congressional District, got $200,000 from DMFI on May 29. New Yorkers Fighting Back, which supports Rep. Dan Goldman in the Tenth District in New York, got $100,000 from DMFI. Espaillat is also benefiting from heavy super PAC support from BOLD America, recipient of $650,000 from United Democracy Project in May.
Add to that a curious $100,000 transfer to Save Democracy PAC, which did minimal spending in 2024 and no independent expenditures yet this year (it ran some ads in 2025 for Stella Pekarsky, who finished third in the race to replace the late Gerry Connolly in VA-11, and has given dozens of PAC donations to federal candidates and campaign groups).
In all, pro-Israel groups transferred $2.375 million to outside PACs in May. Adding in prior transfers, the total from the groups comes to roughly $7.95 million.
“Voters should not have to look under every rock to find out whether a Democratic group that pretends to be focused entirely on one issue is actually just a vehicle for AIPAC to hide its spending in our elections,” Andrabi, of Justice Democrats, said.
DMFI and United Democracy Project have also spent directly this cycle. As of May 31, DMFI has spent $2.7 million in independent expenditures, primarily in five races, winning three and losing two. (That includes the Powell race it bugged out of, so really it’s a 2-2 record.) United Democracy Project has spent a more robust $20 million in four races, winning one (Republican Ed Gallrein’s challenge to Rep. Tom Massie), losing one, and in another delivering an ambiguous result. UDP successfully ran ads against Tom Malinowski in a special election in New Jersey this year (NJ-07), but the winner, Analilia Mejia, is far more critical of Israel than Malinowski. (DMFI directly supported Tahesha Way in that race.) Two UDP investments have yet to be decided: Adrian Boafo in MD-05, whose election is on Tuesday, and Michigan Senate candidate Haley Stevens, whose election is in August.
The pro-Israel PACs’ record in races with direct spending, then, is around 50 percent, which could be why they’ve been spreading the wealth to other PACs. But the partners haven’t done that much better, and after the next couple of weeks that record could look even worse.
Espaillat and Goldman, the two New York City incumbents whose pop-up PACs got money from the pro-Israel groups, are facing strong challenges from candidates supported by Mayor Zohran Mamdani: Darializa Avila Chevalier in NY-13, and former New York City comptroller Brad Lander in NY-10. Polling has shown Chevalier and Lander ahead, significantly in Lander’s case.
Espaillat in particular has been the beneficiary of a $6.8 million super PAC money cannon, an unknown amount of which is coming from these pro-Israel groups, since we only know about the $850,000 transferred to PACs supporting him as of May 31. Any June transfers won’t be revealed until well after the primary on Tuesday.
BOLD America, for example, only reported $246,000 cash on hand in its last FEC filing as of the end of April, yet it has spent $2.8 million on NY-13 since May 18. That money had to come from somewhere, and United Democracy Project, which already acknowledged a paper trail of support and has $93 million to draw from, is a likely patron.
Nearly half of the $411,000 United for Progress has spent on behalf of Espaillat could have been covered by one DMFI transfer in May. The PAC was created this year and had not revealed any of its donors until DMFI’s disclosure on Saturday.
A network of super PACs backing progressive candidates has provided some counterweight for Chevalier, with $2.9 million in spending from Justice Democrats, American Priorities (a PAC established to offset AIPAC), and Indivisible Action.
Reporting from Drop Site News also showed that Espaillat received a last-minute flood of direct contributions from donors that had previously given to AIPAC. None of these direct contributions count toward the totals in outside spending, and they represent an entirely different way pro-Israel PACs have hidden their influence this cycle, by encouraging donors to give to candidates through special fundraising pages.
Below is the record of candidates receiving support from pro-Israel super PACs and partner PACs the pro-Israel groups have given money to in 2026:
United Democracy Project ($20.01 million):
Wins (1): Ed Gallrein (KY-04), a Republican
“Wins” (1): Defeating Tom Malinowski (NJ-07), but the more left-leaning candidate won
Losses (1): Melissa Conyears-Ervin (IL-07)
To be determined (2): Adrian Boafo (MD-05), Haley Stevens (MI-Sen)
DMFI PAC ($2.7 million):
Wins (2): Marni von Wilpert (CA-48), Johnny Garcia (TX-35)
“Wins” (1): Denise Powell (NE-02), only $659 expended after ads were canceled
Losses (2): Tahesha Way (NJ-07), Jasmeet Bains (CA-22)
Partner PACs ($7.95 million):
Wins (10): Rep. Mike Thompson (CA-04), Connie Chan (CA-11), Melissa Hernandez (CA-14), Marni von Wilpert (CA-48), Melissa Bean (IL-08), Donna Miller (IL-02), Denise Powell (NE-02), Brian Poindexter (OH-07), Bobby Pulido (TX-15), Johnny Garcia (TX-35)
Note: The four “wins” in California races denote that the candidate advanced to the general election.
Losses (7): Lauren Babb Tomlinson (CA-06), Jasmeet Bains (CA-22), Melissa Conyears-Ervin (IL-07), Laura Fine (IL-09), Cherlynn Stevenson (KY-06), Rep. Julie Johnson (TX-33), Stella Pekarsky (VA-11)
To be determined (5): Rep. Diana DeGette (CO-01), Shannon Bird (CO-08), Kaela Jo Berg (MN-02), Rep. Adriano Espaillat (NY-13), Rep. Dan Goldman (NY-10)
