Last week, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) held its annual policy conference. Every year, more than eighteen thousand Americans assemble in Washington, D.C. for the three-day event to show support for Israel, listen to speeches by policymakers and thought leaders, and communicate their views to their senators and representatives (more than half of whom were in attendance themselves).
Opponents of the Jewish state decry the influence of the “Israel Lobby.” Just this past month, noted anti-Semite and sometime presidential pal Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan announced that “when you want something in this world, the Jew holds the door,” and that “the powerful Jews are my enemy.”[1][2]
Attacks on AIPAC and its mission tend to mirror the very charges made against the NRA in the wake of the Parkland, Florida massacre: that the shadowy NRA—the so-called “Gun Lobby”—controls corrupt politicians through large financial donations, and that no independent political actor could possibly support gun rights without being on the take. But the smear that their power stems from campaign contributions is false for both organizations, and for the same reason. In each case, the group’s outsized influence comes not from its political donations but from its vast, diverse, and passionate constituency.
Take AIPAC. When critics misleadingly refer to AIPAC as the “Israel Lobby,” they make it sound as though it takes marching orders from the Israeli government. But it doesn’t. Thanks to Israel’s close relationship with U.S. officials and its popularity in Congress and among the American people, Israel doesn’t need a formal lobby to represent its interests. In a 2014 survey, the Sunlight Foundation examined lobbying expenditures by foreign governments, based on mandatory federal disclosures under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The United Arab Emirates topped the list, with $14.1 million spent to influence U.S. foreign policy. As the Washington Post explained, “governments that spend the most here on hired PR are ones that typically don’t have strong established diplomatic ties.” Where did the State of Israel place? Second-to-last (83rd out of 84), spending a mere $1,250.[3][4]
Certainly, AIPAC spends money on politics, but its funding comes from membership dues, conference attendance fees, and private donations. Plus, its members and donors are themselves active in the larger pro-Israel community, which gives AIPAC access to campus groups, business leaders, and engaged citizens of all backgrounds. This is why AIPAC objects to the term “Israel Lobby,” instead calling itself “America’s Pro-Israel Lobby.” And when over 70% of Americans report a favorable opinion of Israel, blaming congressional support for Israel on graft or secret cabals doesn’t hold water.[5]
The parallels to the NRA are obvious. Yes, the NRA enjoys political clout, but not because the gun makers flood it with cash. Firearm manufacturers have their own special interest group, the National Shooting
