Congress

How Bernie Sanders convinced Democrats against arming Israel

Published

2 months ago

April 28, 2026

When Bernie Sanders moved last April to block a U.S. arms sale to Israel, only 14 Democratic senators joined the Vermont independent.

What a difference a year makes: When Sanders objected to another Israeli arms sale this month, 39 other members of the Senate Democratic Caucus joined him — a sea change that has raised eyebrows from Washington to Jerusalem.

In a recent interview, Sanders reflected on the sudden and massive shift, one that has some observers saying he — not Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who has voted to support the arms sales — is leading Senate Democrats on Israel policy.

“That’s true,” Sanders said of the claim. “I mean we got 40 votes, and Schumer got seven. We have more support for our position than Chuck has for his.”

While Republicans and a handful of pro-Israel Democrats have so far been able to push the weapons shipments through, allies of Sanders say the momentum behind his blocking effort has sent an unmistakable signal to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders that they cannot count on unquestioned U.S. support for their military campaigns targeting Gaza, Lebanon and now Iran.

One Democrat who continues to support the sales, Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, said the Netanyahu government should be reined in but said Sanders was pursuing “the wrong vehicle to try to achieve those changes.” And most of those who recently came to oppose the arms sales cited the Iran War and the risk of further escalation in the region — not Sanders.

But fellow Vermont Sen. Peter Welch, a Democratic co-sponsor of the two most recent blocking resolutions, said Sanders “absolutely” deserves recognition for the growing support they have found:

“Having been with him from the beginning, he has been outspoken and influential,” he said.

The following interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Were you surprised Chuck Schumer didn’t change his vote? And do you think it could change in the future?

You’ll have to talk to Chuck about that. But you’re right. I mean I think what is noteworthy — and I think people are discussing it — is that you have two major leaders of the Democratic Party, both Chuck and [DSCC Chair] Kirsten Gillibrand, being in the significant minority of the party in terms of their votes on continuing to fund military aid to Israel. [Schumer and Gillibrand did not respond to requests for comment.]

The split was reportedly a topic of discussion during a Senate Republican lunch last week. Semafor reported that Majority Whip John Barrasso argued you lead Democrats on Israel — not Schumer.

That’s true. I mean we got 40 votes and Schumer got seven votes right? We have more support for our position than Chuck has for his position. That’s obviously the case.

Were you surprised by any of the votes you got this month?

As you know, we’ve had a solid group of people who have voted with us in the past. But also what we are seeing, you know, folks who are looking at both policy and politics — people like Mark Kelly of Arizona, Cory Booker of New Jersey and a number of others — who are saying it’s time that we began to vote the way our constituents would like us to vote.

Are you doing any lobbying? Are you just calling these votes up, or are you actually talking to your colleagues behind the scenes?

Well, I think the answer is mostly no. I think the issue is so clear. Every member of the Democratic Caucus fully understands that Israel is now sadly and tragically run by a right-wing extremist government led by Netanyahu. Democrats are going home, they’re holding town meetings and people are saying, “Why the hell, when we can’t afford housing and health care, are you spending our money providing military aid to Israel, which is doing such horrible things in Gaza, Iran, Lebanon and the West Bank?”

The polling out there now is quite clear that the majority of the American people, including independents and Republicans combined, now think that we should not be giving military aid to Israel. The problem for the Democrats is that [the American Israel Public Affairs Committee] is enormously powerful — they’ve spent tens of millions of dollars in campaign contributions and they have something like $93 million in their war chest right now. For Democrats to take on AIPAC is not easy, but they’re increasingly choosing to support what the people back home want.

What do you say to colleagues who have concerns about looking like they don’t support Israel as a state or don’t want to be seen as antisemitic?

Antisemitism is an absolutely disgusting ideology which has resulted in the deaths of many, many millions of people over the years, 6 million people under Hitler, and it needs to be combated in every way, shape or form. But I will oppose with every ounce of my fiber, anybody who suggests that taking on the racist and extremist policies of the Netanyahu government is antisemitic. That is nonsense.

All over this country, there is growing opposition to U.S. military aid to Israel. The reason for that is not difficult to understand: The American people were shocked and horrified by the Hamas terrorist attack against Israel and were prepared to support Israel going after Hamas, but what they were not prepared to do was to support Israel waging an all-out war against the Palestinian people. And then they look up one day a few months ago, and Israel gets the United States to engage in an absolutely unnecessary, unprovoked war with Iran, which is doing massive damage economically to us and people all over the world.

Do you have plans to force more of these arms-sale votes in the future? Do you think you can eventually win?

Obviously yes. We are going to stay on this issue. There are going to be a certain group of hardcore people in both parties who are going to remain loyal to AIPAC. But I think you’re going to see significant defections in the Republican Party and maybe some more votes in the Democratic caucus as well.

Congress

GOP hard-liners outline anti-abortion, military funding demands for party-line bill

Published

1 hour ago

June 24, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House Freedom Caucus sent a letter to Speaker Mike Johnson on Wednesday outlining its demands for a third reconciliation bill, including extending a prohibition on federal funding for abortion providers and immediately paying for any new spending.

“This is our last and best chance to prove they were right to send us here to fight for them,” the House Freedom Caucus Board of Directors wrote in the letter, referring to U.S. voters who gave the GOP control of both chambers this Congress. “That is why any Reconciliation 3.0 bill must be focused on wins for the American people.”

The letter comes as House Republicans have started to move ahead on another party-line package, though without consensus on the details of what the legislation will actually include. The conference is considering provisions to fund the war in Iran alongside other policies related to affordability and health care. The bill is also expected to tackle alleged fraud in government programs as one way to offset the costs.

Several members of the conservative hard-liner group in recent weeks have warned they would only support the upcoming bill if any new spending included in it is fully paid for. Some members, like Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, have also said the pay-fors need to be immediate — not several years in the future.

In the letter, the members also told Johnson the next bill should eliminate clean energy tax credits — something they pushed for in the first reconciliation bill last year. The lawmakers are also asking for reforms to health care, the removal of certain firearm-related taxes and “responsible short-term funding for key government personnel and services” to prevent another government shutdown ahead of the midterms.

With the military funding portion of the reconciliation bill, the members requested the package should be used to “modernize our military and deliver clear America First national security priorities.”

“Together with President Trump, we must use our unified Republican majorities to advance a bold, America First agenda,” the members wrote in the letter. “We control the field — we cannot afford to leave any points on the board in reconciliation. We stand ready to work with you to accomplish this goal.”

Congress

Johnson to meet with Trump in last-ditch bid to unstick House floor

Published

2 hours ago

June 24, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Republican leaders are scrambling to regain control of the House after GOP hard-liners effectively shut down the floor Wednesday over their demands that the Senate pass a stalled elections overhaul bill.

Speaker Mike Johnson is set to meet with President Donald Trump Thursday morning in an effort to try and find a way out of the mess, according to four people granted anonymity to describe the private plans.

Johnson is planning to keep the House in session Thursday and have members vote on at least one bipartisan bill that has already been teed up for the floor as he tries to convince the president to help end the hard-liners’ blockade.

GOP leaders hoped to put several additional bills up for a vote this week, including a pair of fiscal 2027 spending measures. But the group of MAGA loyalists, led by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, is insisting no legislation can pass until the SAVE America Act clears the Senate.

If Johnson can’t enlist Trump to break the impasse, the House will leave for the week, the four people said.

A breakthrough won’t be easy. The president is just as animated about the SAVE America Act as the hard-liners holding up the House floor. He abruptly canceled a planned bill-signing for landmark bipartisan housing legislation Wednesday morning, just hours before it was scheduled to take place in the Capitol with Johnson and other GOP leaders, citing the need to prioritize the elections bill.

Johnson is expected to pitch Trump on a plan to enact a watered-down version of the SAVE America Act’s proof-of-citizenship requirement by including a grant program to encourage adoption of voter ID laws in a long-shot plan to pass a new party-line policy bill this year.

But that is only a fraction of what Trump wants the Republican Congress to get done this year, and the GOP hard-liners are already panning Johnson’s plan as insufficient.

Congress

A frustrated Trump unloads on Senate Republicans behind closed doors

Published

3 hours ago

June 24, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senate Republicans hoped to use a closed-door lunch to clear the air with President Donald Trump. Instead, the president vented his frustrations with the senators for more than an hour, leaving them no closer to detente.

The meeting came at an explosive moment, with GOP lawmakers increasingly frustrated by Trump’s mercurial treatment of congressional Republican priorities. Just hours before arriving on Capitol Hill, Trump delivered his latest rug-pull — announcing he would refuse to sign a major housing bill that leaders were already touting after big bipartisan majorities passed it this week.

But senators said Trump arrived determined to prosecute his internal grudges against the Republican lawmakers who have opposed him at times — particularly those who have expressed misgivings about the Iran war and who are refusing to comply with the president’s demands for swift passage of a controversial elections bill.

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) described Trump as “mad as a murder hornet” about the Iran vote, while Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kansas) described the scene as “very much like a hospital board meeting, when a bunch of doctors are yelling at each other.”

Marshall added that “at the end of the day, we’ll figure out a way to get along.”

Another GOP senator, granted anonymity to speak candidly, called the lunch “very intense.” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), deploying some go-to congressional lingo for heated encounters, called it “spirited,” “frank” and “candid.”

Trump and Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) sparred at length over the Iran war, according to two people granted anonymity to describe the private interaction. Trump also railed over Tuesday’s successful war powers vote, lambasting Cassidy and three other GOP senators who voted for the resolution.

Cassidy acknowledged the two had a heated exchange to reporters after the lunch. After Trump questioned why Republicans would vote against him on the war, Cassidy said he told the president that the conflict was not going as well as senators were being told.

“The president said something negative about me. I received it as attempting to bully me from asking a question that I think the American people need to know, and I’m not going to be bullied,” said Cassidy, who recently lost his campaign for renomination after Trump endorsed against him.

Sen. Jim Justice (R-W.Va.) also confirmed the exchange between Trump and Cassidy. He said the two “harbor bad feelings” and urged them both to move on.

The meeting also failed to reveal a way forward on Trump’s No. 1 priority, the elections bill known as the SAVE America Act.

Trump cited the need to pass the legislation in his stunning decision Wednesday morning to cancel a signing ceremony for the long-stalled housing bill. A rostrum had been erected in Statuary Hall for the occasion, and House GOP leaders were promoting its benefits at a news conference when the presidential U-turn occurred.

Senators said Trump largely reiterated his publicly stated positions on the housing bill, the GOP election bill and his demand that they eliminate the 60-vote legislative filibuster.

“He believes that the SAVE America act ought to be in front of the housing bill,” Justice said.

Sen. Rand Paul said there had been “a thorough airing” of the elections bill during the meeting, but added it’s unclear “if there is a solution.”

The announcement only served to further exasperate the Senate GOP ahead of the lunch, which had been arranged by Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), a MAGA loyalist who acted without the foreknowledge of Senate Majority Leader John Thune.

Underscoring the mood going into the meeting, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said, “I would advise them to only use plastic utensils today.”

Republicans had hoped the housing bill would give them a long-sought legislative victory that would get the party on the same page and give them a foothold to argue that they are responding to Americans’ affordability concerns heading into the midterms.

Instead, Trump’s surprise declaration, which appeared to catch even some of his own staff off guard, became the latest curveball for Senate Republicans — following a surprise request for White House ballroom security funding and the announcement of a Justice Department “Anti-Weaponization Fund” that overshadowed and delayed passage of a GOP immigration enforcement bill.

Since then, Trump also has thrown a key surveillance program into limbo and upended the confirmation plans for his own nominee for director of national intelligence.

Most persistently, he has fixated on Senate Republicans passing the SAVE America Act — including by eliminating the filibuster — even though Thune and other GOP senators have said repeatedly that there aren’t the votes to do that.

“There is a huge group of people who really appreciate what the president is doing right now and it’s the Democrat party,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said. ”And we’ve got to get our act together and stop surprising people and stop having conflicting messages.”