Ileana Ros-Lehtinen And J-Street

I want to address a recent issue regarding J-Street, but before I do, I should make a full disclosure.  Together with over 600 other rabbis and cantors, I am a member of the J-Street Rabbinic Cabinet.  I am not an opponent of AIPAC, but that organization serves a different purpose.  I feel strongly that American Jews concerned for Israel’s secular and democratic future should be able to directly fund and support pro-Israel candidates who also support an active U.S. role in peacemaking.

Now to the matter at hand.  J-Street just called for Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen to give back donations that she received from Irving Moskowitz:

The new Chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen seems to see nothing wrong with taking large campaign contributions from Irving Moskowitz, a notorious funder of settlements in East Jerusalem’s Palestinian neighborhoods.

Moskowitz actively works to derail the chances for a two-state solution by funding Jewish settler housing in the middle of Palestinian neighborhoods – and has been condemned by both Republican and Democratic US Administrations for undermining the prospects of peace.

With the two-state solution hanging by a thread, what a terrible signal it sends for an American political leader to be so cozy with a far-right political funder whose actions undermine the foreign policy of the United States and makes a two-state solution harder to achieve.

I am no fan of Moskowitz nor his support of hard-line religiously fanatical settlers.  At the same time, I do not agree that Rep. Ros-Lehtinen should return his donations.  As Ron Kampeas ably put it on his JTA blog:

Donors, properly, give to candidates who are closest to their views, not to those who slavishly adhere to them. Candidates, properly, accept this money with the understanding that the donor is not dictating terms, only advancing shared interests. Interests on the other side — in this case J Street — properly organize campaigns to remind the candidate that the donor holds views that may be embarrassing to the candidate.

So, one could conceive of a scenario in which Moskowitz, who isn’t a fan of a two-state solution, gives to Ros-Lehtinen, despite her stated bias for a two-state solution, because she ascribes to tougher standards for the Palestinians. The better of two evils, from his perspective. And she properly accepts the money because, while they don’t agree on outcomes, Ros-Lehtinen and Moskowitz share a skepticism of Palestinian intentions. And then J Street could properly argue that Moskowitz is so removed from Ros-Lehtinen’s ideology that her supporters should call on her to rend asunder her association with Moskowitz.

So more full disclosure before I continue.  I am a constituent of Ros-Lehtinen’s and she is one of the few Republicans for whom I have voted.  She’s a rare Republican who supports gay rights and I appreciate her non-religiously motivated support for Israel.

So I contacted her directly to make sure that I clearly understood her position on a two state solution and this is what she sent to me, via her legislative assistant, within minutes: “Of course I support a two state solution and have said it many times.”  I can attest to hearing her say it.  And while I’m not thrilled about her accepting financing from Irving Moskowitz, there is nothing improper about doing so.