Money, Influence, and What Really Decides Our Elections

In a healthy democracy, disagreements should be settled with debate—not by who can spend the most money.

Groups like AIPAC have the legal right to advocate for policies and support candidates. That’s part of our system. But when outside spending reaches overwhelming levels, it raises a real concern: are voters still the ones deciding elections?

In 2024, a single congressional primary involving Jamaal Bowman became the most expensive House primary in U.S. history.

Around $14.5 million was spent by groups connected to AIPAC opposing Bowman

Total spending in the race exceeded $23 million

Across the 2024 cycle, AIPAC-aligned networks have spent over $100 million

These are not normal numbers for a single House race. They reflect a growing trend of large-scale outside spending shaping political outcomes. This issue goes beyond any one candidate or any one country.

You have the right to:

Support Israel

Criticize Israel

Agree or disagree with any foreign policy position.

That’s how democracy lives. But when criticism is met with overwhelming financial opposition, it creates a system where:

Elected officials may feel pressured to avoid certain positions

Political debate becomes tied to financial risk

Voters are competing with millions of dollars in influence

Therefore.

No organization—regardless of its cause—should be able to dominate elections through sheer financial force.

Transparency laws like the Foreign Agents Registration Act exist for a reason: to ensure that influence in our system is visible and accountable. But transparency alone isn’t enough if the scale of spending continues to grow unchecked.

Here's What I'm Fighting For

Stronger enforcement of the Foreign Agents Registration Act so any foreign-linked influence is fully transparent

Real-time disclosure standards for Super PAC spending, so voters can clearly see who is funding political campaigns as it happens.

Campaign finance reforms that reduce the impact of massive outside spending in individual races.

I’m not here to attack any one group. I’m here to fix a system where money—no matter where it comes from—can outweigh the voices of voters.