But What Can You Do? tracks where 2026 candidates stand on U.S. weapons and funding for the government of Israel. How we check
Andy Biggs
Biggs backs U.S. military aid to the government of Israel when offset rather than borrowed: his 2024 bill offered $17.6 billion "without having to borrow money." He voted against the April 2024 package, objecting that almost half was humanitarian money for Gaza he argued would reach Hamas.
The email has replies@butwhatcanyoudo.org in cc, so we can post their answer on their page in their own words; remove it if you prefer. Keep the subject line as it is, add your name, and send.
You asked Andy Biggs where they stand.
Deep Dive
Biggs represents Arizona's 5th District and won the Republican primary for governor on July 21, 2026. His split votes on the tracked Israel bills are shown as badges, and he has explained the split himself: he supports U.S. military aid to the government of Israel and objects to paying for it with borrowed money. The day after voting against the February 2024 supplemental, he introduced his own $17.6 billion bill, saying "My legislation grants an opportunity to financially support Israel without having to borrow money."
His vote against the April 2024 package has the same stated logic plus a second objection, aimed at U.S. money for Palestinians: in a Washington Times op-ed he wrote "Does Israel need help? Of course," praised the offset-funded November 2023 package, and attacked the April bill because almost half its Israel portion was humanitarian money for Gaza whose distribution he said the administration would control and which he argued would end up rearming Hamas. Cutting that aid to Palestinians and arming the government of Israel are two separate positions, and he holds both.
Beyond the money, he denounced the administration's March 2024 decision not to veto the UN Security Council ceasefire resolution, and in May 2024 introduced a resolution against the International Criminal Court's pursuit of arrest warrants for Israeli officials.
In the 2026 primary his opponent circulated mailers alleging antisemitic associations, citing a June 2023 appearance on a broadcaster's show that has promoted Holocaust denial. Biggs responded: "This notion that I am antisemitic is absolutely one of the most ludicrous, insane arguments ever." In May 2024 he had said "I oppose antisemitism in all its forms" while raising free-speech concerns about writing a specific definition into federal law.
The record
Supported sending weapons or funding in 4 of 6 tracked votes
How this mark works
We track key votes on sending U.S. weapons and money to the government of Israel. A check means every tracked vote they cast came down against sending more, on the side of peace and de-escalation. A question mark means a mixed record: they sided with sending up to half of the time. An X means they voted to send more weapons and money in over half of their tracked votes, even as the way those weapons and dollars were being used became more and more obvious. At exactly half, money this election cycle from a lobbying group we track, or an endorsement from a group that backs sending weapons, makes it an X. Only votes actually cast are counted. Where a candidate has no recorded votes on these bills, the mark comes instead from a reviewed reading of their public record (money from the lobbying groups we track, endorsements, and their own words since January 26, 2024). There an X also covers fully backing the conduct of the war by the government of Israel without significant reservations, and a question mark also covers speaking about Israel without saying clearly where they stand on U.S. weapons and funding. A dash means No Position Found: we found nothing in their own words about Israel, Gaza or the war.
See a dash? Ask the candidate where they stand, then send us their answer and we'll review it and update the mark. Or volunteer to help review candidates.
Voted to send weapons or funding in more than half of their recorded tracked votes. (Supported sending weapons or funding in 4 of 6 tracked votes.)
The money
$10K in lifetime support from the five lobbying groups we track
In their words
Research log
The notes behind this card: what we looked at, what we found, and where each item came from.
U.S. military aid and weapons to Israel
- [Position, 2024-02-07] Introduced the Fiscally Responsible Israel Supplemental Act, 2024: $17.6 billion in military and security assistance to Israel, paid for by repealing the Fiscal Responsibility Act's Commerce/IRS funds (his release, read and verified verbatim): "Israel remains America's greatest ally and deserves to be protected from barbaric actors like Hamas... My legislation grants an opportunity to financially support Israel without having to borrow money." The release also states the House had voted down the previous day's supplemental "as the package offered no spending offsets," which is his H.R. 7217 (118th Congress) No badge explained in his own release.
- [Position, 2024-04-24] Washington Times op-ed via his office, read: "Does Israel need help? Of course. That is why the best thing that House Speaker Mike Johnson has done was to push a package that provided military and humanitarian aid to Israel last November." Against the April package (his H.R. 8034 (118th Congress) No badge): "Almost half of the Israel aid package goes to 'humanitarian' purposes," "Up to $9 billion to the same Gaza," Hamas "has been hijacking most, if not all, of the humanitarian aid that Israel has facilitated," and "almost half of the Israel funding will likely be used to refurbish and rearm Hamas." The phrase "undeniably needs military assistance" comes from an earlier summary, not from him; corrected here.
- His six tracked-vote badges (Yes hr6126, No hr7217, No hr8034, Yes hr8369, No on both cut amendments) align with the offset logic above; the two No votes on more-support bills are characterized on the card because he has spoken about both.
U.S. aid to Palestinians
- [Position, 2024-04-24] The same op-ed opposes the package's Gaza humanitarian component (up to $9 billion), arguing administration control and diversion by Hamas. This is a position AGAINST U.S. humanitarian money to Gaza, named as such on the card so it cannot read as a weapons position.
Characterization of the conflict
- [Position, 2024-03-28] Letter to the President denouncing the decision not to veto the UN Security Council resolution calling for an immediate Gaza ceasefire; argued it undermined Israel's security and its ability to defeat Hamas.
- [Position, 2024-04-24] Op-ed characterizations, on the page read: Israel "has offered a cease-fire seven times"; the administration "captured by antisemitic radicals who want the genocidal eradication of Israel"; "Hamas animals." Rhetoric reproduced here so the record is complete; not card material.
- [Reaction window, 2024-01-15, per an advocacy tracker] "Barbaric actors" and "thugs filled with pure evil" characterizations of Hamas, opposing unconditional-ceasefire demands (reversecanarymission.org, an advocacy site). Not on the card summary. The "barbaric actors" phrase also appears in his 2024-02-07 release above, which is position-band and verified.
- [Earlier record, 2019-05-06] Statement after Gaza rocket fire: stands with Israel, "enduring ally in the Middle East."
- [Earlier record, 2017-01-05] Statement criticizing UN Security Council Resolution 2334; international resolutions impede direct negotiation.
Related rhetoric and lobbying
- [Position, 2024-05-28, reported] Introduced H.Res. 1253 against the ICC prosecutor's arrest warrants for Israeli officials; asserted the tribunal lacks jurisdiction over Israel (Arab Center DC analysis, an advocacy-adjacent research source; attributive).
- [Position, 2024-10-03, reported; unverified source] Newsmax appearance after Iranian missile strikes: argued the U.S. should not constrain Israel's military response (YouTube, video not watched; attributive, not card material).
- AIPAC lifetime support is a badge; not restated.
Safety and antisemitism (context)
- [Position, 2024-05-01] Statement on the Antisemitism Awareness Act: "I oppose antisemitism in all its forms"; called campus demonstrations "sickening", as reported; raised free-speech concerns about codifying a specific definition in federal law.
- [Position, 2026-03-12] Primary opponent David Schweikert's mailer accused him of associating with white supremacists and being antisemitic, citing his June 2023 appearance on Stew Peters' show (a broadcaster the Times of Israel reports has promoted Holocaust denial) and, per the coverage, his endorsement of a candidate who owned Mein Kampf. The underlying appearance is June 2023 (prior band); the allegations and coverage are 2026.
- [Position, 2026-06-18] His response, verified verbatim: "This notion that I am antisemitic is absolutely one of the most ludicrous, insane arguments ever." Also covered by JPost and a FOX 10 interview clip.
- [Position, 2026-07-26] Race context: Republican nominee since the 2026-07-21 primary (Ballotpedia, Wikipedia).
Also in this race
- ?Mixed Katie Hobbs (Democrat)
- –No Position Found Risa Lombardo (Green)
- ?Mixed Teri Hourihan (Other)
All Arizona candidates.
See everyone on the Arizona ballot →But What Can You Do? tracks where 2026 candidates stand on U.S. weapons and funding for the government of Israel. Every claim on this page goes through at least two verification steps. Open Find Your Candidates for votes, funding and contact details.