But What Can You Do? tracks where 2026 candidates stand on U.S. weapons and funding for the government of Israel. How we check
Cait Conley
Democrat · U.S. House, New York District 17
✗SupportsFrom money backing them
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.
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.
Conley is an Army combat veteran, a West Point graduate and a former Director for Counterterrorism on the National Security Council. She won the Democratic primary in New York’s 17th District on June 23, 2026 and faces the Republican incumbent, Mike Lawler.
At an April 23, 2026 forum held by the Jewish Democratic Council of America, a group that endorses Democratic candidates, she distanced herself from an effort by 40 Senate Democrats to block certain military sales to the government of Israel. "What I’m concerned about is what we are seeing is politicians now trying to make calls on what assistance should or should not go, whether this system or that, whether this thing or that, instead of actually relying upon the process that was designed where informed professionals are shaping what those packages are. There is a politicization of security that I do not believe is good for America’s national security or global stability," she said. "I think we need to take politicians out of that equation and have a discussion on are the standards being met or not, and that is neutral to whatever ally we’re talking about," she continued. A local report on the forum said both candidates "are hesitant to support aid cuts to the State of Israel".
On Gaza, Jewish Insider’s report on the forum says she wants long-term peace, guaranteed by a trusted third-party peacekeeping force in Gaza "supported by U.S. reconstruction aid." That is the reporter’s summary of her answer; the report does not quote her on it.
She backed a two-state solution at the same forum, and her campaign’s policy page supports "a two-state solution as the only viable long-term path to ensure Israel remains a secure, democratic Jewish state while Palestinians achieve legitimate aspirations for self-determination." JTA’s report on her primary win says she views Israel as a critical national security ally, and that she and her primary rival have both said they support the U.S. alliance with Israel while opposing actions by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.
Her own words on the July 2026 House amendment to cut $3.3 billion in U.S. military aid to the government of Israel were not located. Her opponent’s campaign has pressed her to state her position on that vote; the dispute is on her research page.
Her funding from a pro-Israel committee is shown separately on this card.
The money
$3K in lifetime support from the five lobbying groups we track
Lifetime support from the five lobbying groups we track
DMFI: $2,881.82
Support-only OpenFEC data (as of 2026-10-03). Opposition independent expenditures are excluded.
Who these lobbying groups are
DMFI PAC$2,881.82Democratic Majority for Israel's PAC; calls itself the home for pro-Israel Democrats and backs Democratic candidates who support a strong U.S. alliance with the government of Israel.Direct contributions and independent expenditures supporting this candidate from the five lobbying groups we track, every cycle each has filed, through 2026. Excludes earmarked and conduit contributions.
Endorsed by DMFI PAC
DMFI PACDemocratic Majority for Israel's PAC; calls itself the home for pro-Israel Democrats and backs Democratic candidates who support a strong U.S. alliance with the government of Israel.These endorsements come from groups that back sending U.S. weapons and funding to the government of Israel.
In their words
“There is a politicization of security that I do not believe is good for America's national security or global stability.”
“What I’m concerned about is what we are seeing is politicians now trying to make calls on what assistance should or should not go, whether this system or that, whether this thing or that, instead of actually relying upon the process that was designed where informed professionals are shaping what those packages are.”
“I think we need to take politicians out of that equation and have a discussion on are the standards being met or not, and that is neutral to whatever ally we’re talking about”
“Supporting a two-state solution as the only viable long-term path to ensure Israel remains a secure, democratic Jewish state while Palestinians achieve legitimate aspirations for self-determination.”
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 the government of Israel
[Position, 2026-04-23] At the Jewish Democratic Council of America forum, per Jewish Insider (published 2026-04-24), she distanced herself from an effort by 40 Senate Democrats to block certain military sales to Israel. The report's own summary: she "doesn’t believe that lawmakers should be trying to determine which specific systems should be provided to allies, but she also argued that the U.S. must continue to enforce global standards to ensure that all aid recipients are meeting U.S. standards." Her words: "What I’m concerned about is what we are seeing is politicians now trying to make calls on what assistance should or should not go, whether this system or that, whether this thing or that, instead of actually relying upon the process that was designed where informed professionals are shaping what those packages are. There is a politicization of security that I do not believe is good for America’s national security or global stability". And: "I think we need to take politicians out of that equation and have a discussion on are the standards being met or not, and that is neutral to whatever ally we’re talking about". The report adds that she said lawmakers' interference over which systems to send Ukraine hurt that country's ability to defend itself.
[Position, 2026-04-23] The Rockland County Times (published 2026-04-30), on the same forum, of both candidates together: "Both candidates are hesitant to support aid cuts to the State of Israel but believe that certain standards of practice must be met by all of America’s international allies who receive aid from the American taxpayer."
[Reported, 2026-07-17 and 2026-07-19; her opponent's account] The July 2026 House amendment to cut $3.3 billion in U.S. military aid to Israel. Mike Lawler's campaign release of 2026-07-17 says she claimed she "would have supported $3.3 billion in military aid for Israel while also saying that the same vote was “shameful”". Monsey Scoop (2026-07-19) reports "Conley’s reported comments that she would have supported a $3.3 billion military aid package for Israel while also calling the vote “shameful.”" and adds: "Conley has not publicly responded to the latest criticism." Neither page quotes her, and her own words on the amendment were not located, on her campaign site or elsewhere.
[Reported, 2026-01-16] A January 2026 forum at the Nyack Center with seven Democratic candidates is the subject of a Hudson Valley Digger report by David McKay Wilson. The page opens, but the section with the candidates' answers is for subscribers and was not read, so nothing is claimed from it beyond its subtitle (under Characterization).
U.S. aid to Palestinians
[Position, 2026-04-23] Per Jewish Insider, she "wants to see long-term peace, guaranteed by a trusted third-party peacekeeping force in Gaza supported by U.S. reconstruction aid." This is the reporter's summary of her answer; the report does not quote her on it.
[Position, read 2026-09-26; page modified 2026-05-20] Her campaign's policy page backs "Restoring USAID funding to rebuild America’s foreign aid capacity to maintain strength and stability abroad, and stop diseases from coming to our shores." It does not mention Gaza or Palestinians.
Characterization of the conflict
[Position, read 2026-09-26; page modified 2026-05-20] Her campaign's policy page: "Supporting a two-state solution as the only viable long-term path to ensure Israel remains a secure, democratic Jewish state while Palestinians achieve legitimate aspirations for self-determination."
[Position, 2026-04-23] The Rockland County Times: at the forum she "threw her support behind a two state solution as well." Jewish Insider: she "continues to believe in the importance of a strong U.S.-Israel relationship".
[Position, 2026-06-23] JTA’s primary-night report: "she has said that she supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and views Israel as a critical national security ally." Of her and her primary rival together: "Davidson and Conley have both said they support the United States alliance with Israel while opposing actions by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government."
[Reported, 2026-01-16] The Hudson Valley Digger report on the January Nyack Center forum is subtitled "Chatzky blames Netanyahu for rise in antisemitism while all support two-state solution", said of the seven candidates together.
Related rhetoric and lobbying
Nothing located in her own words on lobbying groups.
[Read 2026-09-26] The Jewish Democratic Council of America, which "endorses candidates who share our Jewish and Democratic values", lists her on its endorsements page. The entry repeats her campaign's two-state wording.
[Context only, never the answer to what America sends.]
[Position, 2026-04-23] Per Jewish Insider, she said she "has past experience fighting antisemitism as an official at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which sent teams to faith-based institutions to help them improve their security" (the reporter's words), and that the administration should be increasing funding and support for such programs, alongside the Department of Education, rather than cutting them.
[Position, 2026-04-23] The Rockland County Times: she "promised to restore funds that were cut to the Department of Education that went towards education on bigotry and prejudice."
What the campaign site and own pages say
Her campaign's policy page (read 2026-09-26; last modified 2026-05-20), under "Defending Our Interests Abroad", lists the two-state and USAID lines above, and "Ending military escalation with Iran and pursuing diplomacy to ensure Iran never gets a nuclear weapon." It names no U.S. weapons package, amount or condition for the government of Israel.
Her campaign's home page (read 2026-09-26) carries her biography: West Point, 16 years as an active-duty Army officer, and service "as the Director for Counterterrorism on the National Security Council at the White House".
Her campaign Facebook page (read 2026-09-26) is a "Political Candidate" page listing the campaign's site and email; nothing on these questions was visible to a logged-out reader.
The race
She won the June 23, 2026 Democratic primary, per JTA’s primary-night report, and faces the Republican incumbent, Mike Lawler, in November.
Places that could not be read, so nothing is claimed from them
The sentence "It’s more important than ever that we understand what is happening with our tax dollars, what aid is being used for, and ensuring that it’s truly making Americans, Israelis, Palestinians and everyone in the region more safe." is not hers. In the Jewish Insider report it stands in the section on her primary rival, Beth Davidson, between two of Davidson's statements, and nothing on the page ties it to Conley. This card showed it as Conley's until 2026-09-26.
The dispute over the July 2026 amendment is her opponent's account, so it stays here.
The Safety and antisemitism entries are context, not an answer on what the United States sends.
Sources retrieved for this card (address; opened or could not open; date)
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.