But What Can You Do? tracks where 2026 candidates stand on U.S. weapons and funding for the government of Israel. How we check
Harriet Hageman
Hageman's House votes run one way: for U.S. weapons and money to the government of Israel, and against amendments that would have cut them. She said she voted for the Israel supplemental and would "always stand with Israel in the face of terror".
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 Harriet Hageman where they stand.
Deep Dive
Hageman holds Wyoming's single seat in the House and is running for the Senate. Her votes on this question are on this card and they are uniform; the prose does not re-list them. On every tracked bill sending money or weapons to the government of Israel she voted yes, and on both tracked amendments that would have taken money away, including one to strike funding for joint missile-defense programs, she voted no.
She has explained them. In April 2024, when the House split the aid package into separate bills, she voted against the Ukraine bill and for the Israel one: "I voted YES on assistance to one of our closest allies Israel to help respond to the brutal and unprovoked terrorist attacks perpetrated by Hamas and Iran. House Republicans are clear in our demands – secure the border and defend Israel. This is the only provision of the package which delivers on these priorities, and I will always stand with Israel in the face of terror."
Earlier that year she had voted for a standalone aid bill that failed under suspension of the rules, saying: "Israel is a strong ally and a key partner in fighting against terrorism in the Middle East. Their presence in the region makes the United States safer by exposing threats that could ultimately lead to terror attacks in our country." That is the characterization this record had been carrying with no source and no date behind it.
One vote of hers runs the other way and is worth reading carefully. She voted against the Antisemitism Awareness Act on constitutional grounds, objecting to writing an outside body's definition into federal law: "I abhor terrorists, terrorist sympathizers, and antisemites, and I strongly believe the people currently violating laws on college campuses ought to be expelled and prosecuted, or both. But this bill, with its unconstitutional definitions outsourced to a foreign body, is not the answer." Nothing was located from her on U.S. funding for Palestinians, in either direction.
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
$15K in lifetime support from the five lobbying groups we track
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, 2023 to 2026] Six recorded House votes, all in the same direction: yes on each of the four tracked bills providing money or weapons to the government of Israel, and no on each of the two tracked amendments that would have cut them. Each was cross-checked against the House Clerk's own roll call, for example one of the appropriations bills and the amendment to strike missile-defense funding. The card renders them; the prose does not re-list them or restate the tallies.
- [Position, 2024-04-20] Statement on voting against the Ukraine bill and for the Israel bill, dated on the page and read and confirmed word for word: "I voted YES on assistance to one of our closest allies Israel to help respond to the brutal and unprovoked terrorist attacks perpetrated by Hamas and Iran. House Republicans are clear in our demands – secure the border and defend Israel. This is the only provision of the package which delivers on these priorities, and I will always stand with Israel in the face of terror." The same page records her objection to the two bills being combined in the Senate without a further House vote.
- [Position, 2024-02-06] Statement on a standalone aid bill that failed under suspension of the rules, dated on the page and confirmed: "Israel is a strong ally and a key partner in fighting against terrorism in the Middle East. Their presence in the region makes the United States safer by exposing threats that could ultimately lead to terror attacks in our country." Her office's page states the bill would have provided $17.6 billion. Part of the same quoted passage refers to events inside the reaction window and is not used on the card.
- [Reaction window, 2023-11-02] Statement on the earlier security funding vote, in which she describes Israel as on the front lines against Islamic terrorism. Not on the card summary.
U.S. aid to Palestinians
- Nothing located, in either direction, in this record or in a fresh search of the open record in August 2026.
- [Unconfirmed, 2026-01-14] A fresh search reported her pointing to provisions cutting U.S. funding to United Nations bodies, naming the agency for Palestinian refugees. Its only carrier is a syndicated feed page rather than a statement of hers, so nothing from it is quoted and it is not on the card. If a primary page for it exists, it would add a named direction on U.S. money to this card.
Characterization of the conflict
- Carried inside the statements above. The characterization this record had been carrying with no source and no date, that she calls Israel a key ally that must be supported, is her own wording from the February 2024 release and is now sourced.
- [Reaction window, 2023-10-07] A television interview on the day of the attack. Not on the card summary; the carrier is her office's in-the-news page.
- [Position, 2024-02-12] Responding to protesters at the Wyoming State Capitol, she said that if they wanted to support Hamas they should leave the country (Cowboy State Daily). Recorded here rather than on the card: it is about protesters in Wyoming rather than about what the United States sends.
Related rhetoric and lobbying
- [Reaction window, 2023-11-02 and 2023-11-07] She first declined to censure a colleague over remarks about the war, arguing that disagreeable speech is not unlawful speech, then a week later supported a formal condemnation after a video the colleague circulated. Both dated inside the reaction window; not on the card summary. Cowboy State Daily covers the first.
- American Israel Public Affairs Committee support is a badge on this card and is not restated.
Safety and antisemitism (context)
- [Position, 2024-05-01] Statement on voting against the Antisemitism Awareness Act, dated on the page and confirmed word for word: "I abhor terrorists, terrorist sympathizers, and antisemites, and I strongly believe the people currently violating laws on college campuses ought to be expelled and prosecuted, or both. But this bill, with its unconstitutional definitions outsourced to a foreign body, is not the answer." Her objection is to writing an outside definition into federal law, not to the bill's subject.
- [Position, 2024-05-15] A video statement on campus protests. No readable transcript, so nothing from it is quoted.
Race and status context
- Wyoming's at-large member of the House, running in the Republican primary for the U.S. Senate against four others, per Ballotpedia's race page and her Ballotpedia profile.
- She was not in the Senate for any of the tracked Senate votes; the House votes above are the record.
Note on the source of her identity
- This record resolved her to the sitting representative by surname, state and given name against a public legislator dataset rather than from a congressional identifier, which is a weaker kind of match. Wyoming has one House member and the match is not in doubt, but it is recorded here because the method differs.
Also in this race
- –No Position Found James Byrd (Democrat)
All Wyoming candidates.
See everyone on the Wyoming 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.