But What Can You Do? tracks where 2026 candidates stand on U.S. weapons and funding for the government of Israel. How we check
Jack Codiga
Republican · U.S. House, North Carolina District 12
?Mixed
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.
Two reviewers, reading the public record as a whole, agree: Answering a 2026 voter-guide question, he says the U.S.-Israel relationship "needs to be more balanced to be considered an alliance", without saying where he stands on U.S. weapons and funding for the government of Israel. Reviewed by hand on 2026-10-09. This candidate has no recorded tracked floor votes.
Asked whether the U.S. relationship with Israel is important, Codiga answered "it needs to be more balanced to be considered an alliance." He also calls AIPAC "the Israel lobby, which has too much influence in our politics."
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.
Codiga is the Republican candidate for North Carolina's 12th District.
He answered a direct question in an iVoterGuide questionnaire. Asked "Is the United States' relationship with Israel important, and if so why?", he wrote: "It needs to be more balanced to be considered an alliance." That is the whole of his answer. Asked separately to respond to the statement that Islamic terrorism threatens U.S. national security, he agreed and added: "I agree but similar to the China answer, we have a hand to play in this too (ie unjust wars)."
His Ballotpedia platform raises AIPAC inside a plank about foreign influence in American politics. After arguing that foreign nationals influencing domestic politics should be registered and barred from elections, he writes: "A clear gap in the system is AIPAC, the Israel lobby, which has too much influence in our politics."
He has no federal voting record.
What he has not said is what he would do. He has not stated a position on any specific weapons transfer or funding measure, on conditioning aid, or on U.S. aid to Palestinians. If you want to know how he would vote, he has not yet been asked in a way that produced an answer, and he does not appear to have volunteered one.
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 2026-07-23) from the five lobbying groups we track; earlier cycles and earmarked donations not yet tracked.
Support-only OpenFEC data. Opposition independent expenditures are excluded.
In their words
“It needs to be more balanced to be considered an alliance.”
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, read 2026-08-12] iVoterGuide questionnaire, opened and confirmed word for word. Question: "Is the United States' relationship with Israel important, and if so why?" His entire answer: "It needs to be more balanced to be considered an alliance." Undated form, read at this date.
No position located on any specific weapons transfer, arms package, funding measure, or on conditioning assistance. His questionnaire answers elsewhere on the same form are similarly brief, so the brevity here is his register rather than an evasion of this question in particular.
He has no federal voting record.
[Position, undated, third-party characterization] An advocacy scorecard, youaredone.org, flags him as opposing "unconditional U.S. support for Israeli government actions," sourced to "Jack Codiga for Congress campaign." That is the scorecard's own summary and it is the only basis the research offers for the claim that his platform materials oppose unconditional military support. Advocacy sources are consulted, never card sources, and the underlying campaign text was not located, so this is recorded rather than stated as his position.
U.S. aid to Palestinians
No statement or documented position located.
Characterization of the conflict
[Position, read 2026-08-12] On the same questionnaire, asked to respond to "Islamic terrorism is a threat to the United States' national security," he selected Agree and added: "I agree but similar to the China answer, we have a hand to play in this too (ie unjust wars)" (confirmed verbatim).
No characterization located of the war in Gaza, of a two-state solution, or of Israeli or Palestinian conduct.
Related rhetoric and lobbying
[Position, read 2026-08-12] Ballotpedia, opened and confirmed word for word, in a plank on foreign influence: "Foreign nationals influencing domestic politics should be registered, barred from participating in elections, and, at minimum, face deportation to their country of loyalty. A clear gap in the system is AIPAC, the Israel lobby, which has too much influence in our politics." The AIPAC sentence is quoted on the card, and the sentence before it is given here because it is the frame he put it in.
Safety and antisemitism (context)
[2025-04-30] A comment on a Substack essay about Christian antisemitism, posted under the display name "Jack Codiga," reads: "Spot on. Being called an 'anti-Semite' is the final boss of insults. Glad that I came across this. So many Christians don't question anything about modern day Judaism. And Americans as a whole love to throw them a bone in saying that our country was founded on 'Judeo-Christian values' like that is a thing." Opened and confirmed word for word, and dated 30 April 2025 on the page rather than 29 April as the research has it.
⚠ **Attribution here is a display name on a third-party blog comment and nothing more.** No verification links that account to this candidate. This record already sits in a run that has found nine wrong-person attributions, and a comment of this kind is exactly the material that must not be published on weak attribution. It is recorded here, kept out of the card summary, and flagged for a ruling.
Consulted
predictionedge.com profile; Ballotpedia. Two localcandidates.org URLs were returned (a comparison page and a positions page); under the standing rule they cannot support a claim unless rendered and confirmed under his own heading, and the comparison page in particular pairs him with Rep. Alma Adams, so nothing is taken from either.
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.