But What Can You Do? tracks where 2026 candidates stand on U.S. weapons and funding for the government of Israel. How we check
Jeff Van Drew
- Backed with $30K by PACs we track that support U.S. weapons funding for the government of Israel (lifetime)
- Endorsed by AIPAC
Van Drew answered the conditioning question directly: "Now more than ever the United States must stand in unwavering support with Israel and that support cannot be conditional."
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 Jeff Van Drew where they stand.
Deep Dive
Van Drew has represented New Jersey's 2nd District since 2019.
His April 2024 statement, issued after Iran's missile attacks on Israel, states the position on conditions plainly: "Now more than ever the United States must stand in unwavering support with Israel and that support cannot be conditional. I will always stand with Israel and its people in their fight to protect their sovereignty."
A month later he introduced a resolution criticising the administration for delaying certain offensive weapons shipments during the Rafah operation, which the research records him characterising as an unacceptable betrayal of a key ally.
His record on the subject predates the war: he introduced resolutions condemning rocket attacks from Gaza in 2019 and again in 2021.
In June 2025 he welcomed reported ceasefire negotiations and restated that preventing a nuclear-armed Iran is vital to American and Israeli security.
His recorded votes appear as badges on this card and are consistent with those statements.
The record
Supported sending weapons or funding in 6 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 6 of 6 tracked votes.)
The money
$30K in lifetime support from the five lobbying groups we track
In their words
AIPAC (2026 endorsement)
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, 2024-04-14] His statement after Iran's attacks on Israel, opened and confirmed word for word: "Now more than ever the United States must stand in unwavering support with Israel and that support cannot be conditional," said Congressman Van Drew. "I will always stand with Israel and its people in their fight to protect their sovereignty." The release's own framing describes the need for the United States "to stand in absolute support of Israel."
**"That support cannot be conditional" is a direct answer to this site's central question**, which is why it leads the card.
- [Position, 2024-05-13] Introduced a resolution criticising the delay of certain offensive weapons shipments during the Rafah operation, opened;, as reported he characterised the delay as an unacceptable betrayal of a key regional ally. No verbatim span extracted, so the characterization is recorded as the research's.
- [After October 7, 2023-11-26, reported] On Fox News, argued for lifting U.S. restrictions on military aid and allowing Israel to draw from U.S. strategic stockpiles, calling Israel one of America's greatest allies. From the weeks right after October 7, and the source is a broadcast; summarised, not quoted.
- [2024-10-18] NJ Spotlight News on the near-unanimity of New Jersey's House members in supporting U.S. military aid to Israel. Delegation context, not a statement by him.
- His recorded votes appear as badges on this card.
U.S. aid to Palestinians
- No statement or documented position located.
Characterization of the conflict
- [Position, 2025-06-24] Statement on reported ceasefire negotiations, as reported praising efforts by President Trump and restating that preventing a nuclear-armed Iran is vital to American and Israeli security. Not opened. Also two further June 2025 releases.
- [After October 7, 2023-10-11] Statement after the attacks, as reported saying terrorism in all forms must be rejected and the U.S. must stand behind Israel's right to self-defence. From the weeks right after October 7.
- [After October 7, 2023-11-02, reported] On Newsmax, accused the United Nations of failing to condemn Hamas adequately (Newsmax). From the weeks right after October 7.
- [Prior, 2021-05-14] Introduced a resolution condemning rocket strikes, as reported characterising Hamas as an "Islamic terrorist organization." Prior band.
- [Prior, 2019-11-21] Introduced H.Res. 727 condemning rocket attacks from Gaza. Prior band by seven years.
Related rhetoric and lobbying
- [Prior, 2018-10-04] As a state senator running for Congress as a Democrat, accepted the endorsement of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, saying he was a "life-long supporter of Israel" (InsiderNJ). Prior band by eight years, and from before he changed party. Recorded because §3.7 keeps the record.
Safety and antisemitism (context)
- [Prior, 2019-09-18] Joined the whole New Jersey House delegation in a joint statement denouncing antisemitic rhetoric. Prior band, group statement, safety context.
Note on sources
- Nineteen entries, of which **eight are unlabelled YouTube videos** and one is an undated newsletter. His own dated releases carry the record, and the two that matter most were opened.
Also in this race
- ?Mixed Zack Mullock (Democrat)
- ✓Opposes Ramon Mora Jr. (Independent)
All New Jersey candidates.
See everyone on the New Jersey 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.