How AIPAC Channels Millions Through Shell PACs Ahead of US Midterms

The midterms are often touted as a test of American democracy’s mettle. But this year, it’s clear that some groups are more interested in testing the system than in serving the public interest. The latest revelation about AIPAC’s use of shell PACs to channel millions into election campaigns is just the latest example.

Shell PACs are political action committees whose sole purpose appears to be funneling funds to other groups, often with little or no transparency. In AIPAC’s case, these PACs are used to hide the group’s involvement in election campaigns, allowing it to exert significant influence without being held accountable.

The details of AIPAC’s tactics are fascinating – and disturbing. Take the case of Bushra Amiwala, a congressional candidate who was boosted by an advertisement paid for by Chicago Progressive Partnership, a PAC linked to AIPAC. But here’s the catch: this group didn’t have to reveal its funding sources until after the election, at which point it turned out that the sole funder was Elect Chicago Women (ECW), another PAC.

ECW in turn received over $4 million from United Democracy Project (UDP), the election arm of AIPAC. UDP had raised some of this money from other sources, including a $1 million donation from investor Blair Frank, one of its largest donors. This is just one example of how PACs are being used as conduits for AIPAC’s cash.

Critics argue that this use of shell PACs is evidence of AIPAC’s desperation to conceal its involvement in election campaigns. As Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson at Justice Democrats, put it: “Every cycle, AIPAC shows just how broken our democracy is and how corrupt our political finance system is.”

The use of shell PACs by AIPAC highlights the broader problem of campaign finance in the US. Thanks to a 2010 Supreme Court ruling, corporations and advocacy groups can spend unlimited amounts on elections as long as they don’t directly coordinate with campaigns. This has created a system where influence is bought and sold through complex webs of PACs and nonprofits.

In many cases, these groups don’t have to reveal their donors until after the election – or in some cases, at all. It’s this lack of transparency that allows AIPAC to hide its involvement in election campaigns, and it’s this same opacity that fuels public disillusionment with politics as a whole.

AIPAC’s tactics are not only seen as corrupt – they’re also increasingly unpopular. A recent survey by The New York Times and Siena College showed that 37% of US voters now sympathize with Palestinians, while 35% identify with Israelis. Among Democratic respondents, 57% felt greater sympathy for the Palestinians.

This shift in public opinion is no coincidence – it’s a direct result of growing awareness about Israel-backed policies, including the joint US-Israeli war against Iran and the genocidal assault on Gaza. As Omar Shakir, executive director of DAWN, noted: “AIPAC’s use of shell groups is a reflection of that growing repudiation.”

The implications of AIPAC’s tactics are far-reaching – and deeply disturbing. By hiding its involvement in election campaigns, the group is undermining trust in US democracy at large. And it’s not just AIPAC’s actions that are the problem – it’s the broader system that allows such tactics to flourish.

This week, progressive state legislator Chris Rabb condemned Israel’s war crimes and pledged to expose AIPAC’s tactics. It’s time for more politicians to follow suit, and to demand real reform of our campaign finance system.

As long as groups like AIPAC are allowed to operate with such impunity, democracy will remain a sham. The future of American democracy itself hangs in the balance – and it’s up to us to ensure that the system is reformed before it’s too late.