But What Can You Do? tracks where 2026 candidates stand on U.S. weapons and funding for the government of Israel. How we check
Brian Bengs
Independent · U.S. Senate, South Dakota
✓Opposes
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: In a September 2025 essay he refers to Netanyahu's "belligerent policies in this war" and writes that the U.S. government "must enforce accountability by imposing consequences" for Israel's disregard of the law of armed conflict, with nothing pointing the other way. Reviewed by hand on 2026-10-09. This candidate has no recorded tracked floor votes.
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.
Bengs is running for the U.S. Senate in South Dakota as an independent. He is a retired Air Force judge advocate and lieutenant colonel who taught international law and the law of armed conflict, and he has never held elected office, so none of the congressional votes this site tracks are his.
He applies the same reasoning to weapons already delivered. Asked in June 2025 about the strikes on Iran, he said the United States bears part of the responsibility because the aircraft were American: "to an extent we are partially responsible in the sense that we are the primary weapons source for Israel." He also said the strikes had no legal grounds and set a bad precedent.
He is careful about who he is criticizing. The essay opens by separating governments from populations: "Benjamin Netanyahu, his cabinet, and his belligerent policies in this war are not equivalent with the Israeli people. Gaza's Hamas leaders are not equivalent with the Palestinian people." He also writes that he expects to be called antisemitic for it, and invites readers to reply and show him where he has the facts or the law wrong.
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 2026-07-13) 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
“In essence, the United States provides Israel's arsenal.”
“As Israel's primary benefactor on the international stage, the U.S. government must enforce accountability by imposing consequences for Israel's disregard of LOAC.”
“Benjamin Netanyahu, his cabinet, and his belligerent policies in this war are not equivalent with the Israeli people. Gaza's Hamas leaders are not equivalent with the Palestinian people.”
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, 2025-09-10] Essay on his own campaign publication, "Is There Genocide In Gaza?: A Former Law Professor's Analysis", dated on the page and read and confirmed word for word. The passages that matter: "In the last two decades, over 86% of America's annual aid to Israel has been military aid, with U.S. financing comprising about 16% of the Israeli government's defense budget. The justification for this approach has been for U.S. aid to maintain Israel's "qualitative military edge" by giving them access to advanced versions of American technology. In essence, the United States provides Israel's arsenal." And, in his conclusion: "As Israel's primary benefactor on the international stage, the U.S. government must enforce accountability by imposing consequences for Israel's disregard of LOAC. To do that, we need elected officials who understand the historical, political, and legal context of Israel and Palestine." LOAC is his abbreviation for the law of armed conflict, spelled out in the essay's opening. This is the source of the accountability claim this record had been carrying with no date and no page.
[Position, 2025-06-14] Interview with KOTA, dated on the page and confirmed: "I think Iran has already said we are partially responsible, and to an extent we are partially responsible in the sense that we are the primary weapons source for Israel," and "They get their aircraft, I believe it was 200 aircraft I heard were used in this strike, they're probably almost all going to be American aircraft." The station also reports him saying the strikes lacked legal grounds and set a bad precedent. Note for the reader: this same report carries a statement from the incumbent senator in this race, who has his own card here; that statement is used on his card and not on this one.
[Unconfirmed, 2025-09-09] A fresh search reported a post of his on the Israeli strike on diplomatic targets in Qatar, including "Using US-supplied weapons to attack another US ally is unacceptable. As Israel's primary benefactor, the US can & should impose accountability". The carrier is a social platform page that returns an error to us, so nothing from it is quoted. Its substance matches the essay above, which is quoted instead.
[Position, 2026-03-23] South Dakota Standard carries his criticism of expanding American military involvement in the region and of the money spent on it.
U.S. aid to Palestinians
Nothing located as a separate position. The essay above discusses humanitarian conditions in Gaza and notes that American military aid continued while government reports stopped short of finding that assistance was being blocked.
Characterization of the conflict
[Position, 2025-09-10] From the essay, confirmed: "Throughout this discussion, it is crucial to separate the actions of a government from the people living under that government. Benjamin Netanyahu, his cabinet, and his belligerent policies in this war are not equivalent with the Israeli people. Gaza's Hamas leaders are not equivalent with the Palestinian people." The essay works through findings by international courts and human rights organizations and applies the legal test to them.
[Position, 2025-11-02] A guest column in The Dakota Scout on a diplomatic framework involving a pause in fighting and hostage releases, which he treats as a step forward, and on American politicians using foreign conflicts for domestic argument.
Related rhetoric and lobbying
[Position, 2025-09-10] From the essay: he criticizes the framing of an accusation of genocide as inherently antisemitic, and criticizes the executive order sanctioning the International Criminal Court after it issued arrest warrants for Israeli officials.
A separate report about this Senate race records that he posted a graphic in February 2026 about finance and technology political action committees funding the incumbent; nothing in it touches this subject.
Safety and antisemitism (context)
[Position, 2025-09-10] From the essay, confirmed: "Indeed, I will likely be accused of antisemitism for negative commentary about Israel's actions." He argues in the same passage that criticism of a government's conduct is not prejudice against a people, and invites readers to reply with where he has the facts or the law wrong.
[Position, read 2026-08-17] Campaign site home page: biography, Navy and Air Force service, work as a park ranger, and a values quiz. His long-form writing lives on the campaign publication linked above.
He did not serve in Congress during any of the tracked votes.
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.