But What Can You Do? tracks where 2026 candidates stand on U.S. weapons and funding for the government of Israel. How we check
Rachel Lee Fetty Anderson
Anderson's campaign issues page, under its Israel and Palestine heading, says she supports a two-state solution and would not vote to send or sell weapons to any country except for purely self-defense. "Both Israel and Palestine deserve to exist," it reads.
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 Rachel Lee Fetty Anderson where they stand.
Deep Dive
Anderson is a Morgantown attorney and former city councilmember, and the Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate in West Virginia. She has never held federal office, so none of the congressional votes this site tracks are hers, and everything below comes from what she has published herself.
Her campaign's issues page carries a short section headed on Israel and Palestine. It reads in full: "I support a two-state solution. Both Israel and Palestine deserve to exist. I would not vote to send or sell weapons to any country except for purely self-defense. Candidates should not take campaign contributions from foreign governments or foreign governments' PACs." The weapons sentence is written about every country rather than about one, and she places it under that heading. She does not name the government of Israel in it.
A separate section on the same page, headed on war, sets out the rule she says she would apply: "US military power should be reserved for self-defense. The Constitution states it is the job of Congress to declare war, not the President. No troops should ever be placed in harm's way without the approval of Congress." Her platform page adds a demand for audits: "I will demand accountability for American funds and assets to ensure they are spent in a Constitutional manner requiring audits of the Defense department, foreign and corporate payments, investment and gifts to all elected officials." The line about refusing money from foreign governments and their political action committees is about how a campaign is funded, not about weapons, and it is not counted here as a weapons position.
Nothing was located from her on U.S. funding for Palestinians as such, and nothing outside her own website: no vote, no legislative record and no independent coverage of these positions that we could open. The pages themselves carry no date.
The record
• Has no federal legislative record; positions on Israel arms sales exist only as stated campaign platform commitments (self-defense-only weapons transfers; two-state solution; no foreign-government campaign money). Documented from her campaign website only; no independent corroboration found.
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.
Two reviewers, reading the public record as a whole, agree: Under her Israel and Palestine heading she would send or sell weapons only for purely self-defense, a conditions statement allowing some weapons but not others. Reviewed by hand on 2026-10-01. This candidate has no recorded tracked floor votes.
The money
Checked the five lobbying groups we track; no direct 2026 support found
In their words
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, read 2026-08-18] Her campaign issues page, under a heading on Israel and Palestine, verified word for word: "I support a two-state solution. Both Israel and Palestine deserve to exist. I would not vote to send or sell weapons to any country except for purely self-defense. Candidates should not take campaign contributions from foreign governments or foreign governments' PACs." The page carries no date; it was first read on 2026-07-24 and read again on the date above. What the sentence says: a self-defense-only condition on sending or selling weapons, written about any country and placed under that heading. What it does not say: anything naming the government of Israel. Both facts are on the card and the reader is left to weigh them.
- [Position, read 2026-08-18] Same page, under a heading on war, verified word for word: "US military power should be reserved for self-defense. The Constitution states it is the job of Congress to declare war, not the President. No troops should ever be placed in harm's way without the approval of Congress."
- [Unconfirmed, reported as 2026-08-01] A fresh search reported a statement of hers criticizing provisions in the next defense authorization bill that would fund joint defense work with Israel and integrate Israeli systems, research and supply chains with the American military, which she is said to have called unprecedented and, set against cuts to food assistance and Medicare, totally unacceptable to West Virginia taxpayers. The two addresses cited are on a social platform and both return an error to us, so nothing from it is quoted and it is not on the card. If it can be opened, it is a directly on-point statement and would change this card.
U.S. aid to Palestinians
- Nothing located on U.S. humanitarian funding, the aid pipeline, or the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. Her two-state sentence is about recognition, not about money, and is not read as a funding position.
Characterization of the conflict
- Nothing located that can be opened beyond the two-state sentence above.
- [Unconfirmed, reported as 2026-03-02] A fresh search reported remarks of hers on the human cost of the escalation with Iran, framed in scriptural terms. The page cited is a news round-up hosted on the incumbent senator's own website; it opens but serves only navigation to us, not the article body, so her words could not be read. She is the incumbent's opponent, so a round-up on that host is in any case used with care: nothing from it is quoted here.
Related rhetoric and lobbying
- [Position, read 2026-08-18] Her platform page, verified word for word: "I will demand accountability for American funds and assets to ensure they are spent in a Constitutional manner requiring audits of the Defense department, foreign and corporate payments, investment and gifts to all elected officials." Undated, as above.
- Her line about candidates not taking money from foreign governments or their political action committees is a campaign-finance position. It is not a position on U.S. weapons or funding and is not presented as one.
Safety and antisemitism (context)
- Nothing located.
Race and status context
- Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate in West Virginia, running against the incumbent and two others, per Ballotpedia's race page and her Ballotpedia profile. The incumbent has her own card on this site and her record is not used here.
- Everything in scope on this record that can be read comes from her own campaign site. No independent coverage of these positions was located that opens to us, and she has no legislative record against which to check them.
- She did not serve in Congress during any of the tracked votes.
Also in this race
- ✗Supports Shelley Moore Capito (Republican)
- –No Position Found Rio Phillips (write-in) (Independent)
- ?Mixed Marshall Wilson (Other)
All West Virginia candidates.
See everyone on the West Virginia 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.