A not-so-funny thing happened on the way to the 2026 midterm congressional elections. The group that once helped shape American political issues became an American political issue itself.

Ground Zero for that phenomenon is the charred political landscape of Michigan, though trace elements are visible in Massachusetts as well. In both states – two places with vastly different economies, political traditions, physical attributes, and powerful interest groups – prominent candidates are foreswearing connections with AIPAC.

The group, formally known as the American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC), has 6.5 million members and has long has been a fixture in Washington. It is not too much to say that its representatives, familiar figures on Capitol Hill and elsewhere, have been unusually respected figures, some of them verging on being venerated. The group’s record in winning political battles, and funding, for Israel is impressive, though AIPAC makes it clear, in its website, that it does not lobby for “unconditional aid to Israel or a blank check for Israel.”

The group defies stereotypes, for while Jews are known to lean heavily toward the Democratic Party – on average supporting Democratic presidential candidates at a rate of 71% – AIPAC is resolutely non-partisan. Seldom has that characteristic been on display more vividly than in recent years; AIPAC candidates who prevailed in the 2024 congressional elections included 206 Republicans and only 120 Democrats. That ratio is roughly replicated in AIPAC endorsement and funding recipients this year, and perhaps will trend even more heavily Republican before the general election campaign is over in November.

In Massachusetts, the two Democratic Senate primary candidates have said they would not accept AIPAC funding, with Rep. Seth Moulton of Salem, who is challenging Sen. Edward Markey of Malden, making a national splash when he made that announcement (a day after declaring his candidacy for the senate). Neither Markey nor Republican Senate candidate John Deaton has accepted AIPAC contributions.

The situation is more complicated, and thus murkier, in Michigan, where a bruising Democratic primary brought issues involving Israel to the front burner of a political race that attracted national attention for its ferocity, its impact – and its significance for the future of American (and, in a way, Israeli) politics.

But that was just the warm-up for the even more captivating, and almost certainly more significant, developments that followed the primary.

First, the predicate. AIPAC’s United Democracy Program spent heavily to support Rep. Haley Stevens in the Democratic primary. Its support of the four-term congresswoman was largely a bludgeon to achieve its greater goal, which was to defeat Abdul El-Sayed, who prevailed by a small margin. El-Sayed, who supports Palestinian rights and argues that Israel prosecuted “genocide” in its anti-Hamas response to the terror attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, made the tens of millions of dollars that AIPAC spent an issue in the race.

He also argued that his opposition to Israel does not constitute antisemitism, saying, “My commitment to Jewish safety is the same commitment that I have to the safety of my own daughters.” In recent days, El-Sayed has come under fire from Democrats – including at least a half-dozen congressional figures such as Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Jacky Rosen of Nevada – who are troubled that he has not sufficiently distanced himself from influencer Hasan Piker, who has argued that one of the reasons for antisemitic violence is Jews’ support for Israel.

Now El-Sayed, who if elected would be the first Muslim member of the Senate, is facing Rep. Mike Rogers in the general election, and the Republican nominee is struggling with the AIPAC issue. The lobby group’s political-spending arm, which customarily focuses on primaries rather than general elections, is eager to continue its struggle against El-Sayed. It is willing, and ready, to spend millions on Rogers’ behalf.

But the Republican candidate, who trails by small amounts in recent polls, is squeamish about accepting AIPAC support, some of which would include advertisements about issues that have nothing to do with Israel.

On the one hand, the money would be useful in a sprawling state with 10 media markets and a record of swinging between Republicans and Democrats. On the other, AIPAC has become a target for progressives who deplore Israel’s policies and for some Republicans, who increasingly are skeptical of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Rogers met with several AIPAC representatives in California earlier this month, the goal presumably being to temper the visible presence of AIPAC in his campaign so as to maximize the funding advantage without reaping the public-relations disadvantage of the ties with the group. It is a difficult political pas de deux to perform, especially because of legal complications and restrictions governing campaign and candidate collusion with independent spending groups.

All this is occurring in the complex political environment of Michigan, roiled this summer by a separate factor: the U.S.-Canada trade war that has great implications for the auto business.

The state voted Democratic in the six presidential elections from 1992 to 2012, but since then has become a classic swing state, siding with Donald Trump in 2016, Joe Biden in 2020, and Trump again in 2024. Michigan is home to 241,828 Muslims, about double the Jewish population, which has been on edge since the 2026 attack on Temple Sinai in West Bloomfield Township.

But all this attention on the American midterm elections may obscure a similarly vital political event, the Israeli elections this autumn, when all 120 seats of the Knesset are being contested. Netanyahu’s coalition faces a stern test that it may not pass. In recent days, the prime minister has warned that if his coalition is defeated, “There’ll be a fascist regime” running Israel. An Economist/YouGov poll found that 54% of Americans have a negative view of Netanyahu, with 23% holding a positive view.

There’s the rub for AIPAC. The group’s traditional role has been to support the elected government of Israel, a view anathema to a majority of Americans while that government is headed by Netanyahu.

Then again, if Netanyahu is defeated, AIPAC’s goal to strengthen the U.S.-Israeli relationship, and its effort to find a welcome ear on Capitol Hill, would presumably be all the easier. The period between Oct. 28 (the Israeli elections) and Nov. 3 (the U.S. elections) comprises seven days that shape the future of two countries – and AIPAC. Θ

David M. Shribman, who won a Pulitzer Prize as Washington bureau chief of The Boston Globe, is executive editor emeritus of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and teaches at Carnegie Mellon University and McGill University.