View as Webpage--Use the link when sharing or quoting on FB or Twitter.

Steven Richard Sheffey's

Chicagoland Pro-Israel Political Update

Calling balls and strikes for the pro-Israel community since 2006

Follow me on Twitter

Join our mailing list

July 5, 2020

121 days till Election Day

If you remember nothing else, remember this:

Read to the end for fun stuff and upcoming events. I love when you tell me about mistakes--consider it a quid pro quo.

You're welcome to read for free, but if you'd like to help defray the cost of the newsletter, please click here and fill in the amount of your choice . You don't need a PayPal account; the link will allow you to use a credit card. Or you can Venmo @Steven-Sheffey (last four 9479).



Friends,

Need another reason to worry about a second term for Donald Trump? I'm happy to oblige: John Bolton warned Israel last week that if Trump is reelected, Trump might cozy up to Iran. “Just as Kim Jong Un played Trump along in the Korea context, I worry that in a second term the Iranians might be able to do the same,” Bolton said. Bolton is probably right but he should have testified when he could have made a difference. As Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) said, "Bolton may be an author, but he’s no patriot."

Democrats will not condition aid to Israel on unilateral annexation.

Joe Biden, who opposes unilateral annexation because he understands the dangers unilateral annexation would pose to Israel and the United States, has said that conditioning aid to Israel would be “ outrageous” and “a gigantic mistake.”

A dozen Democratic House members out of 233 signed a letter arguing for the "withholding funds for the off-shore procurement of Israeli weapons equal to or exceeding the amount the Israeli government spends annually to fund settlements." They are referring to arms Israel purchases from countries other than the U.S. with American aid--roughly $800 million of the $3.8 billion that we provide to Israel for security assistance. However, under the terms of our Memorandum of Understanding with Israel, aid for off-shore procurement drops every year and will end by 2028 regardless of what Israel does or does not do.

Of the 61 Democrats elected for the first time in 2018, only five signed this letter--90% of the newly elected Democrats did not sign the letter, so if anyone is worried about trends in the Democratic Party, they need to brush up on their math. Legislation conditioning aid to Israel will not be brought to the floor for a vote, let alone pass.

Exaggerating the influence of a handful of Democrats helps some on the far left exaggerate their own influence. Some on the far right exaggerate the influence of a handful of Democrats because the worse the Democratic Party looks, the better their electoral chances. Both will claim that various primary results reflect the policy preferences of Democratic voters despite little or no evidence that foreign policy in general, or Israel in particular, factored into voting decisions. Organizations outside these districts may have focused on Israel, but if polling shows that concerns about Israel influenced the outcome of any primaries thus far, I haven't seen it.

Those of us who dwell in the fact-based, math-based world can see for ourselves that the overwhelming majority of Democrats continue to support a strong U.S.-Israel relationship, and that's not changing. The votes in this current Congress, which includes 61 freshman Democrats, prove it. Recent primary results, including victories in New York by Mondaire Jones and Jamaal Bowman, will not change this math.

But the facts won't let the GOP try to persuade us that four of the 61 freshman Democrats, not the other 57, not the other 229 Democrats in the House, are the faces of the Democratic Party. They'd rather have you see the faces of four women of color than the one angry white male who is running this country into the ground, which says all you need to know about how the GOP thinks and how they misunderstand how we think.

These four are each unique individuals with different backgrounds who do not agree on everything. Unlike Donald Trump, who heads the Republican Party and to whom the rest of the GOP gives the fealty you'd expect a peasant to give a feudal lord, these four freshman Democrats are not in leadership and at least on Israel--where they themselves have differences--are not in the mainstream of the Democratic Party.

Democrats recognize that Israel faces external threats. As much as we might disagree with unilateral annexation, the response is not to jeopardize Israel's security. Israel does not forfeit its right to exist by virtue of a bad decision. At the same time, it's not hard to understand why, if a key argument for supporting Israel is shared values, more and more Americans will ask whether we have a right or even an obligation to insist that our aid does not fund activities that we disagree with.

If the likelihood of unilateral annexation increases, we will hear more calls for American aid to Israel not be used to fund annexation. But American aid to Israel, as currently structured, cannot be used to support annexation. We don't need legislation to prevent what cannot happen.

Moreover, proposing legislation to condition aid on annexation would be counterproductive--it would not pass, it would not change anything, but to the extent it received any support, it could dilute what until now has been near unanimous Democratic consensus against unilateral annexation because it would force the vast majority of Democrats, who oppose unilateral annexation, to vote against a largely symbolic measure because they also oppose conditioning aid to Israel.

The best way to ensure continued support for Israel and to safeguard Israel's security is to speak out now against unilateral annexation and by doing so, help our friends in Israel understand the political ramifications of unilateral annexation in the U.S.

A two-state solution is the best defense against the global BDS movement. A two-state solution necessarily means Palestinian rejection of further claims against Israel (or else Israel would not enter into such a solution), and if Palestinians have their own state and renounce further claims, then BDS doesn't have a leg to stand on. Taking that a step further, if Israel is serious about reaching a two-state solution and the Palestinians are seen as the obstacle to peace, then that also undercuts BDS. But if Israel is seen as the party not serious about a two-state solution, which is exactly the signal unilateral annexation would send, it becomes much harder to argue against a non-violent protest movement like BDS.

As Rabbi Sharon Brous wrote, unilateral annexation would "effectively mean the end of the dream of the two-state state solution and an end to the peace process, and it would make a mockery of Israel’s commitment to Jewish and democratic values of human dignity, equality for all people, and the pursuit of peace."

The pro-Israel community should unite in opposition to unilateral annexation, but since only the Democratic Party is fighting against unilateral annexation, it's easy to understand why so many Jewish Americans are Democrats. As David Schraub wrote, there are two reasons Jews vote Democratic:

For more on unilateral annexation, watch this JDCA webinar with Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and former U.S. ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro.

Last week's newsletter .

ICYMI. Joe Biden is a mensch.

Tweet of the Week. Rep. Sean Casten (D-IL) .

Twitter Thread of the Week. Libby .

Heartwarming Twitter Thread of the Week. Great Carl Reiner story .

Video Clip of the Week. Sacha Baron Cohen pranked a conservative rally into singing racist lyrics. Read about it here and watch it here.

Political Ad of the Week. He went to Jared--we paid the price.

I guess this is a good problem to have: This list is now so large that while many people are local, even more live outside the Chicago area and have no interest in local news. If you want to be on a list that will receive infrequent newsletters about local issues and events, reply to this email and I'll add you.

Did someone forward this newsletter to you? Why not subscribe? It's free! Just click here . 

Donations are welcome (because this costs money to send) . If you'd like to chip in,  click here and fill in the amount of your choice . You don't need a PayPal account; the link will allow you to use a credit card. If you'd rather send a check, please reply and I'll send you mailing information (please do NOT send checks to the P.O. Box). Venmo to @Steven-Sheffey (last four 9479) is fine too.

You’re reading this. So are other influentials. If you want the right people to know about your candidate, cause, or event, reply to this email to discuss your ad.

The Fine Print : This newsletter usually runs on Sunday mornings. Unless stated otherwise, my views do not necessarily reflect the views of any candidates or organizations that I support or am associated with. I reserve the right to change my mind as I learn more. Intelligent, well-informed people may disagree with me; read opposing views and decide for yourself. A link to an article doesn't mean that I agree with everything its author has ever said or that I even agree with everything in the article; it means that the article supports or elaborates on the point I was making. I take pride in accurately reporting the facts on which I base my opinions. Tell me if you spot any inaccuracies, typos, or other mistakes so that I can correct them in the next newsletter (and give you credit if you want it). Advertisements reflect the views of the advertisers, not necessarily of me, and advertisers are solely responsible for the content of their advertisements. I read, value, and encourage replies to my newsletters, but I don't always have time to acknowledge replies or to engage in one-on-one discussion. Don't expect a reply if your message is uncivil or if it's clear from your message that you haven't read the newsletter or clicked on the relevant links. © 2020 Steve Sheffey. All rights reserved.