What Aipac announced

On Wednesday, Aipac told the public it was ending two practices at once: endorsing candidates and giving them direct contributions. The reversal arrives a short three election cycles after the pro-Israel lobby first launched its political action committee and began endorsing hopefuls.

The change does not end its political spending. Aipac pledged to maintain the work of its deep-pocketed Super Pac, United Democracy Project, and to continue funding pro-Israel candidates through donors and members.

• •Aipac will stop endorsing candidates
• •Aipac will stop making direct contributions to candidates
• •United Democracy Project will keep operating
• •Funding for pro-Israel candidates continues through donors and members

A tough 2026 outlook

Jewish Insider was the first to report a letter Aipac's leadership sent to members, in which it called the 2026 election "one of the most challenging environments in recent memory" for the group. The same letter warned that the "challenges we are confronting will continue to grow in the years ahead".

The group defended its record in the same letter, saying it had helped 290 candidates this election cycle and contributed to the defeat of 29 candidates it described as 'anti-Israel'. A spokesperson told Jewish Insider that members contributed over $90m to candidates this election cycle, far more than the $3m donated directly through its Pac.

Candidates distance themselves

The announcement follows a run of defections. New York congressman Pat Ryan said last week that he would return nearly $250,000 from Aipac. Past recipients of the group's money have been walking away too: over twelve of them have gone public with their break from Aipac.

The spending around one race underlines the scale of Aipac's involvement. The New York Times reported on Wednesday that Aipac planned to give as much as $9m to a Pac supporting Republican Senate candidate Mike Rogers over Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan. Aipac had already spent $32m seeking to defeat El-Sayed, an outspoken critic of Israel, in the primaries.

Critics see an admission

Opponents of the group were quick to hail the development as Aipac's admission of how toxic its brand had become. Beth Miller, political director of Jewish Voice for Peace Action, said: "Through this shift, AIPAC openly admitted that their brand has become toxic in the political world". She added that her group would keep pressing to remove Aipac and its money from politics, saying "we will continue to fight to fully get them, and their dirty money, out of our politics".

Journalist Dion Nissenbaum, whose documentary on Aipac was published this week, said the announcement appeared to be the first real admission from Aipac that their campaign strategy has backfired. He also cautioned that the move may be an attempt to reinvent itself without ceding the battlefield, since its Super Pac would keep operating.

Other critics went further. In a written comment, Trita Parsi argued that the lobby's name has become so damaging that it is now avoiding putting that name on its political donations. Hamid Bendaas of the Institute for Middle East Understanding Policy Project claimed Aipac had already been testing methods that would make its backing harder to trace.

Bendaas compared the decision to "an animal that chews its leg off to get out of a bear trap", a last-resort choice to survive, and he argued Aipac would continue influencing elections.

Hady Amr, former US secretary for Israeli and Palestinian affairs, took a different view, saying "This is Aipac going back to their tried and true approach". Groups such as TrackAipac and the Reject Aipac campaign have played a growing role in calling out candidates over their ties to the group.

Aipac did not respond to a request for comment.