But What Can You Do? tracks where 2026 candidates stand on U.S. weapons and funding for the government of Israel. How we check

John Day

–

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.

No recorded votes on the bills we track. We found nothing in their own words about Israel, Gaza or the war.

Nothing located has Day taking a position on U.S. weapons or money for the government of Israel, or on U.S. aid to Palestinians. At a forum voters pressed the field about the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and no answer of his was recorded.

✉ Copy a message to send them

We don’t have a campaign email on file yet. Copy this message and send it through their website or a public social account.

If you send this from your own email, cc replies@butwhatcanyoudo.org so we can post their answer.

Your record on weapons and funding for the government of Israel [ref: la3-day]

Dear John Day,

You're asking for my vote, and there is one question I can't find your answer to: should the United States keep sending weapons and funding to the government of Israel?

Your campaign hasn't said where you stand, and for many voters in this race it decides the vote. A short answer would help: will you vote against further weapons and funding for the government of Israel, or for enforceable conditions on that support?

I may share your answer publicly so other voters can see it.

Respectfully,
[Your name]

Deep Dive

Day is a Democratic candidate in Louisiana's 3rd District, a Navy veteran who worked in health care and insurance.

He has been in a room where the question was asked. At a Lafayette candidate forum in April 2026 he shared a stage with two of his opponents, and an attendee speaking for younger voters pressed the candidates on the American Israel Public Affairs Committee alongside campaign finance and petrochemical expansion. The account of what the candidates said in reply records answers on carbon capture and on land, and none from any of them on the lobbying question. Day is quoted at length elsewhere in the same piece, on impeachment and on immigration enforcement, so the silence is not for want of coverage.

His campaign site was read through and carries nothing on these questions, and his Ballotpedia profile records that he has not completed that site's candidate survey. His campaign is built on insurance costs, health care, coastal protection and disaster recovery.

What was checked to reach that conclusion is listed on this card's research page. You are better placed to get an answer than we are. Ask Day directly, or at a candidate forum, and send us the reply: it goes on this page in his own words.

The money

Checked the five lobbying groups we track; no direct 2026 support found

2026 support from the five lobbying groups we track

Nothing recorded (as of 2026-09-27) from the five lobbying groups we track; earlier cycles and earmarked donations not yet tracked.

Support-only OpenFEC data. Opposition independent expenditures are excluded.

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

Nothing located.

U.S. aid to Palestinians

Nothing located.

Characterization of the conflict

Nothing located.

Related rhetoric and lobbying

[Consulted, 2026-04-20] The Bayou Progressive on a Lafayette forum in the Democratic Roadshow series. Opened and read in full. It records that "the questioning turned to AIPAC" among other subjects, and that an attendee "speaking for a group of disillusioned voters under 30 ... pressed the candidates on AIPAC, Citizens United and the continued concentration of chemical and petrochemical plants". The candidate responses the article then records are about carbon capture and about land, and no response from any candidate on the lobbying question is reported.

⚠ **Multi-candidate carrier, read under his own material before anything was concluded.** The same article covers two of his opponents in this district and two candidates in the Senate race, and it quotes several of them directly. Nothing in scope is attributed from it to him or to anyone; what is recorded is that the question was asked in his presence and no answer of his appears. He is quoted elsewhere in the piece on other subjects, which is why the absence is treated as meaningful rather than as thin coverage.

Safety and antisemitism (context)

Nothing located.

Where the absence was checked

[Consulted, read 2026-08-20] His campaign site and its about page. Both opened and read in full; no mention of Israel, Gaza, Palestinians, foreign aid or foreign policy. This is the own-site check the standing rule requires before a card rests on absence.
[Consulted, read 2026-08-20] His Ballotpedia profile. Opened; it records that he has not completed the 2026 candidate survey.
[Consulted] Local coverage of the ballot was read for race context only.

Race and status context

Qualified on Louisiana's certified list for the all-candidate November election in the 3rd District, with a December runoff between the top two if nobody clears half the vote. Six candidates are on the ballot.
He has held no federal office, so there are no recorded votes on this card.

Also in this race

✗ Clay Higgins (Republican)
– Kate Cotten (Republican)
– Caleb "With a C" Walker (Democrat)
? Priscilla Gonzalez (Democrat)
– Tia LeBrun (Independent)

All Louisiana candidates.