Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How has Jasmine Crockett voted on Israel-related bills in Congress?
Executive Summary
Rep. Jasmine Crockett has a mixed record on Israel-related measures: she voted against a November 2023 Israel aid package she described as partisan, fiscally irresponsible, and lacking humanitarian relief for Gaza, while she later voted Yea on the Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024 (H.R. 8034) in April 2024 and supported resolutions backing Israel’s defense after October 7, 2023, even as she publicly urged ceasefire and humanitarian steps. These votes reflect a pattern of supporting robust security assistance to Israel in specific, standalone legislation but opposing omnibus or partisan packages she judged to omit humanitarian assistance or to worsen deficits, and she has publicly framed some votes as responding to bill structure and allied priorities rather than reflexive positions on Israel alone [1] [2] [3].
1. The November 2023 ‘No’ That Raised Eyebrows — Not a Simple Rejection of Israel Aid
In November 2023 Rep. Crockett’s recorded vote against an Israel aid package is framed by her office as a rejection of the bill’s structure and priorities rather than an opposition to Israel’s security per se. Her explanation emphasized that the package was partisan, excluded humanitarian relief for Gaza, omitted allied funding such as for Ukraine, and would add roughly $12.5 billion to the deficit; she presented the vote as a fiscal and moral objection to that specific legislative vehicle rather than a categorical "no" on assistance to Israel [1]. This statement from her office signals a legislative strategy: she distinguishes between bills that comprehensively address security and humanitarian needs and those she views as rushed or imbalanced, and she used these procedural and policy arguments as the basis for her negative vote.
2. The April 2024 Yea Vote — A Clear Exception for H.R. 8034
On April 20, 2024, Crockett cast a recorded Yea on the Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024 (H.R. 8034) according to the roll call record (Roll Call 152), which allocated substantial supplemental funding for Israel’s security needs in the aftermath of October 7, 2023 [2]. This vote demonstrates that when presented with a bill narrowly tailored to security assistance and passed as a dedicated supplemental — rather than a broader partisan omnibus — she was willing to back direct U.S. support. That voting behavior aligns with her earlier public framing: support for robust security assistance can coexist with criticism of bills she regards as fiscally imprudent or lacking humanitarian components; the April vote therefore functions as a concrete instance where legislative form and content aligned with her stated criteria, prompting support.
3. Endorsement of Ceasefire Diplomacy and Humanitarian Concerns — Public Statements Matter
Beyond roll calls, Crockett has issued public statements endorsing ceasefire efforts and expressing hope for lasting peace, while condemning violence and urging humanitarian access and protections for civilians [4]. These statements underscore a dual posture: backing Israel’s right to defend itself after Hamas’s October 7 attacks, as reflected in some votes and resolutions, while simultaneously pressing for diplomatic solutions and humanitarian relief. Her commentary and press releases frame votes as part of a broader policy stance that seeks to reconcile security assistance with human rights and aid for civilians, and she has repeatedly pointed to the absence of humanitarian language or funding as a decisive factor in opposing particular legislative packages [3] [1].
4. How Her Voting Pattern Reads Politically — Principles or Positioning?
Viewed together, Crockett’s votes reveal a pattern of conditional support: she supports targeted security appropriations and resolutions backing Israel’s immediate defense in the wake of Hamas attacks, but she resists omnibus or partisan bills that she believes prioritize short-term political wins over comprehensive responses that include humanitarian aid and allied security needs [2] [1] [3]. Political observers might interpret this as principled legislative scrutiny — emphasizing fiscal responsibility and humanitarian clauses — while critics could portray it as selective positioning. Her office’s public explanations consistently foreground policy content and fiscal impact rather than ideological opposition to Israel, which shapes how constituents and stakeholders assess her record.
5. Where the Record Leaves Open Questions and How Observers Frame It
The available analyses provide concrete roll-call evidence for key votes and public statements but do not fully catalog every Israel-related vote Crockett has cast, leaving room for additional context on lesser-known measures and procedural votes [5] [6]. Different outlets emphasize different takeaways: Crockett’s office and sympathetic coverage stress principled objections to flawed bills and support for targeted assistance, while skeptics focus on any vote against packages labeled "Israel aid" as politically consequential. Those assessing her record should weigh both the roll-call Yea on H.R. 8034 and the November 2023 No — together they paint a consistent legislative logic of conditional, scrutinized support rather than blanket opposition or uncritical backing [2] [1] [3].