Congress's Sugardaddy

By Parker L. Payson

In 1985 a group of British parliamentarians visited Congress. Behind closed doors, they expressed their confusion over US Middle East policy: Why was the US seemingly intent on maintaining bad relations with 21 Arab nations by fervently supporting Israel? Then-House Majority Leader Tom Foley (D-WA) explained that Congressional leaders had little choice, for any criticism of Israel would unleash a political windstorm capable of sweeping any national politician out of office.

Since then the windstorm has whipped itself into a tornado. Pro-Israel political action committees (PACs), which raised over $30 million for federal elections from 1978 to 1988, raised over $6 million in 1989 alone.

PAC contributions are instrumental in maintaining a permanent Congress.

Weeks after the members of the 101st Congress took their seats in January 1989, the pro-Israel community was hard at work tipping chairs. By year's end, 54 pro-Israel PACs had spent $1.4 million on 173 candidates for the 1990 elections, contributing over $36,000 to 20 senatorial candidates running for re-election in 1992 and 1994.

The ability of these PACs to raise tremendous amounts of money a year and a half before the elections demonstrates their organizational strength. It also magnifies their political clout, making them the premiere special interest group on Capitol Hill, or, in the words of former House Speaker Tip O'Neill, "as effective an operation as there is in Washington."

Early donations to friendly incumbents help build war chests so huge that opponents are discouraged from running at all.

Two of the top 10 pro-Israel PAC recipients in the Senate, Joseph Biden (D-DE) and Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), are currently running unopposed. In 1989, over 95 percent of all pro-Israel PAC money went to incumbents. Contributions from pro-Israel PACs, as well as PACs representing other special interests, are instrumental in maintaining a permanent Congress which, in 1988, faced only a two percent turnover.

Pro-Israel PACs generally support incumbents with a proven record of support over challengers with the same commitment. This is bad news for Representative Bill Shuette (R-MI), who has earned a strong rating in the pro-Israel community. This year he is seeking the seat of longtime Israel supporter Carl Levin (D-MI), a senior member of the Armed Services Committee and drafter of a stinging letter to Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole (R-KS) opposing any foreign aid cuts to Israel.

"Levin's ties to the PAC community could help him in terms of fundraising," Shuette acknowledged to the Washington Report. "But I have a close working relationship and strong base of support within the Jewish community." Shuette's kowtow, however, is not enough for pro-Israel PACs. They have already given $116,000 to Levin.

Pro-Israel PACs' support for incumbents is equally upsetting to Representative Claudine Schneider (R-RI) who is seeking to defeat a 30-year veteran of the Senate, Foreign Relations Chairman Claiborne Pell (D-RI) in a race which the Washington Post calls "a contest of gender, generation and style." Both are supporters of a strong Israel. Pell, however, was one of eight senators up for re-election who refused to sign a 1989 letter urging the State Department to deny PLO leader Yasser Arafat a visa to attend a session of the United Nations. Nevertheless, the pro-Israel community has stood behind 71 year-old Pell, contributing $21,000 compared to Schneider's $1,000. Schneider's campaign spokesperson, Ellen Conoway, told the Washington Report that, if time permits, Schneider will visit Israel to strengthen her support within the pro-Israel community, and called pro-Israel PACs' support for Pell "damn frustrating" because "Representative Schneider has a better record on Israel, while Pell has been wishy-washy."

Pro-Israel PACs have strongly supported other members of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, including outspoken champion of Israel Paul Simon (D-IL), who has received $104,351, and Senator Rudy Boschwitz (R-MN), who has called cuts to Israel "neither logical, correct or necessary." Boschwitz, as a member of the Foreign Relations Committee as well as the Europe and Middle East Subcommittee, has received $74,500.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee member Mitch McConnell (R-KY) faces a tough re-election battle against Louisville Judge Harvey Sloane. McConnell, who proposed campaign reform legislation which would outlaw all PACs except non-connected ones, such as pro-Israel PACs, not surprisingly received $59,000 from pro-Israel PACs in 1989.

The Israel lobby has lavished $108,500 on Sen. Bob Harkin (D-IA), who sits on the Appropriations Committee and its Defense and Foreign Operations Subcommittees, for his race against Representative Jim Tauke (R-IA). According to the Detroit Jewish News, analysts are concerned about the race because "Harkin, a good friend with a solid record, now is on two key subcommittee panels," while "Tauke has a mixed to poor record of support for Israel." Pro-Israel PAC support for incumbents is so pervasive that Senator Howell Heflin (D-AL), chairman of the Ethics Committee, has received an astonishing $83,500 even though he does not sit on any committees directly affecting Israel. Heflin's opponent, Alabama State Senator Bill Cabaniss, told the Washington Report that he questioned the general propriety of Heflin's accepting such large amounts of special interest funding, saying:

Howell Heflin is a perfect example of an entrenched incumbent and the problems and trappings associated with that incumbency. For many, many people there's just too cozy a relationship between special interests and these incumbents. A great many people in Alabama are watching how Heflin handles his role as Chairman of the Ethics Committee to see if this relationship has become so tight that it is impossible for the Senate to reprimand other members such as the Keating Five.

In the House of Representatives, donation patterns are similar. Pro-Israel PACs have focused their contributions on incumbents in influential foreign policy positions. The five top recipients of pro-Israel PAC dollars in 1989 (all of whom currently are unopposed) were: Ron Wyden (D-OR), a member of the Arms Control and Foreign Policy Caucus; Les Aspin (D-WI), Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, which oversees US defenses abroad; Sam Gejdenson (D-CT) of the Foreign Affairs Committee, who has consistently opposed arms sales to Arab nations; David Obey (D-WI), Chairman of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee, who recently sponsored legislation withholding contributions to the United Nations for recognizing the PLO; Benjamin Gilman (R-NY), the Ranking Minority member of the Foreign Affairs Committee's Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East, who wrote what he called a "strongly-worded letter to President Bush" opposing US aid cuts to Israel.

As pro-Israel PAC money continues to increase, the number of people who believe that PAC contributions disenfranchise the voters continues to grow. According to a March poll, 71 percent of American voters are in favor of severe restrictions on PACs, while 58 percent want to ban private campaign contributions and support public congressional campaign financing, the highest such figure since Watergate.

"The public has come to believe that Congress no longer represents the people that elect them, but those who contribute big money to their campaigns," says Joan Claybrook, president of the watchdog group Public Citizen. "And they are fed up."

Parker L. Payson is the elections editor for the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.