Where does jasmine crockett fall on congressional caucuses and foreign aid bills related to israel?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Rep. Jasmine Crockett is identified as a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus [1] and has a mixed record on Israel-related votes: she says she voted for supplemental packages that included aid for Gaza and other countries and opposed Israel‑only funding bills [2] [3] [4]. She has publicly called for de‑escalation and a lasting peace and criticized some Israel‑only or Republican‑led aid packages as “partisan, inadequate, and fiscally irresponsible” [5] [6].
1. Progressive caucus membership — a political home with expectations
Crockett is listed as a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which situates her inside the Democratic left and explains why her Israel votes provoke sharp scrutiny from progressive activists who expect firmer opposition to unconditional military aid [1]. That caucus membership heightens expectations that she will support ceasefires, humanitarian relief and stricter conditions on military assistance — standards she has been pressed on by critics and constituents [1].
2. Votes: nuance between supplemental packages and Israel‑only bills
Crockett’s public statements and campaign responses emphasize that she supported supplemental funding packages that bundled aid to multiple actors (including Gaza) while opposing bills that provided funding only to Israel; she has repeatedly framed those votes as principled differences over scope and humanitarian language [3] [4] [2]. Crockett also told reporters she voted for a supplemental package that funded weapons for Israel’s military action in Gaza but stressed she also voted “no” on other bills that were solely for Israel [2] [7].
3. Public messaging: distinguishing people from government, and calling for ceasefire
In public statements Crockett differentiates criticism of Israeli government policy, particularly the Netanyahu administration, from criticism of Israeli civilians; she also has called for an immediate de‑escalation and lasting peace as a policy goal [5] [4]. Her office’s January 18, 2025 statement applauded diplomatic efforts and called for a permanent, lasting peace for both Palestinian and Israeli peoples [5].
4. Criticism from both left and right — why she’s politically exposed
Progressive and Palestinian‑rights groups have criticized what they view as inconsistent or pro‑Israel votes despite her progressive label; news coverage says her voting record on Israel–Palestine issues has drawn criticism and low marks on some issue scorecards [1]. Conversely, social‑media attacks have (according to Crockett and several outlet reports) mischaracterized her as AIPAC‑backed; Crockett denies an AIPAC endorsement and says social posts have been coordinated to mislead [2] [8].
5. Her stated rationale: oppose narrow, partisan measures that mix cuts with aid
Crockett publicly voted against a Republican‑backed Israel aid package in 2023 she described as “partisan, inadequate, and fiscally irresponsible,” arguing that Speaker Johnson’s changes added partisan spending cuts to an emergency bill and created unacceptable precedent [6]. That rationale — opposing how a bill was constructed rather than opposing assistance to Israel outright — recurs in her explanations about later votes [6] [3].
6. Outside trackers and advocacy sites paint conflicting pictures
Third‑party trackers and advocacy pages offer divergent takes: an AJP Action summary lists resolutions Crockett is associated with calling for de‑escalation and condemning attacks [9], while activist watchlists have characterized her as “complicit” based on select votes and past travel [10]. These conflicting portrayals illustrate how different organizations choose specific votes or trips to support contrasting narratives about her stance [9] [10].
7. What available reporting does not say
Available sources do not provide a comprehensive roll‑call list of every Israel‑related vote Crockett has taken across 2023–2025 in one place; they summarize key positions and select votes but do not catalog every bill or amendment and its full text or her recorded rationale for each (not found in current reporting). Detailed campaign finance ties to pro‑Israel donors are also disputed in reporting: Crockett denies an AIPAC endorsement, and the available sources do not confirm any AIPAC endorsement [2] [8].
8. Bottom line for readers and voters
Crockett’s record is best described as mixed and carefully framed: she brands herself as progressive [1] while defending votes for multi‑country supplemental packages and opposing narrowly tailored Israel‑only bills and partisan procedures [3] [6]. That combination pleases neither some progressives demanding stronger ceasfire advocacy nor some pro‑Israel conservatives who seek unconditional support — and it is the core of the current political friction documented in news and campaign reporting [2] [1].