What is the full roll-call list of House members who voted for and against the State Department funding bill containing $3.3B for Israel?
Executive summary
The House passed the State Department/foreign-operations funding minibus (H.R. 7006) that includes $3.3 billion in annual foreign military financing for Israel by a decisive bipartisan margin; multiple outlets reported the final vote as 341–79, and the clerk’s roll-call entries for the resolution and for passage are Roll Call 25 and Roll Call 28 respectively [1] [2] [3]. The publicly authoritative, line-by-line, yes/no list of which members voted for and against is maintained on the House Clerk’s roll-call pages — the provided reporting summarizes outcomes and context but does not reproduce the full, named roll-call in the excerpts supplied [3] [1].
1. The vote totals and the bill tracked in public records
Reporting across outlets described the bill’s passage and quoted the margin — commonly cited as 341 yeas to 79 nays — and identified the measure as the Financial Services and General Government and National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2026 (H.R. 7006) that carried the $3.3 billion Israel FMF figure [1] [4] [5]. The Clerk of the House lists the procedural and final passage roll calls for consideration and passage under Roll Call 25 and Roll Call 28, which are the definitive public records of who voted which way [2] [3].
2. Why the full roll-call matters and where it lives
A line-by-line roll call is the legal and historical record of congressional votes and is hosted on the Clerk’s website; the provided search results include the two relevant Clerk pages but the snippets here do not reproduce the member-level roll-call entries, so the full list of individual “yea,” “nay,” and “present” votes must be retrieved directly from those Clerk pages [2] [3]. Journalistic summaries and interest-group statements (for example AIPAC praising the outcome) quote totals and political implications, but they are not substitutes for the verbatim roll-call maintained by the House Clerk [1].
3. What the reporting says about party patterns and anomalies
Multiple outlets emphasized bipartisan support and identified defections and strategic explanations — journalists and analysts noted that most Republicans and many Democrats supported the bill while a minority opposed it, and some Democrats who voted “yea” publicly framed their choice as preserving defensive aid while criticizing other provisions of the package [1] [6]. Responsible Statecraft and other outlets have previously tracked why some Democrats flip on Israel-related votes and documented public messaging choices; that background helps explain why vote totals can mask intra-party variation and individual members’ caveats [6].
4. Policy riders and political motives tied to the vote
Coverage made clear the H.R. 7006 minibus includes policy riders beyond the FMF number — such as bans on funding for UNRWA and restrictions tied to international bodies like the ICC — which influenced the political calculus for many members who weighed Israel aid alongside these riders and other U.S.-UN policy leverage provisions [5] [7] [4]. Interest groups and appropriations leaders publicly signaled agendas: Appropriations Committee leadership framed the measure as fulfilling a memorandum of understanding with Israel, while advocacy groups on both sides used the outcome to support broader foreign- or human-rights related arguments [8] [1].
5. Limitations of the supplied reporting and how to get the named list
The supplied excerpts and news summaries reliably report the vote total and point to the official Clerk roll calls, but the snippets here do not contain the full, member-by-member roll-call text; therefore—based on the evidence in these sources—the correct next step to obtain the “full roll-call list of House members who voted for and against” is to consult the Clerk’s Roll Call 28 (passage of H.R. 7006) and Roll Call 25 (consideration/resolution) pages, which contain the exact yes/no record and are cited in the materials provided [2] [3]. If a printable or sortable roster is required, the Clerk’s pages allow download or direct copying of the official list; news outlets summarize trends but do not replace that primary record [3].