A political action committee that has spent nearly half a million dollars in ads to bolster Connie Chanโs bid for Congress in the last stretch of the primary is linked directly, albeit circuitously, to pro-Israel lobbying groups.
The money trail, first reported by Drop Site News on Saturday, amounts to an October surprise (in May) for San Francisco progressives.
In 72 hours, they will weigh Chan against Saikat Chakrabarti, the centimillionaire who is neck-and-neck with her in recent polling and vying for the No. 2 spot behind frontrunner Sen. Scott Wiener. The top two finishers in Juneโs primary will advance to Novemberโs general election.
Dozens of online accounts racked up millions of views over the weekend disseminating the ties, including Chakrabarti himself, who said โAIPAC sees me as their biggest threat, so they will do whatever it takes to try to defeat me.โ
Dem. Majority for Israel
United Democracy Project
pro-Israel lobbying group
AIPAC super PAC
$37,750 in-kind polling (April)
$250,000 cash (April)
EDW Action Fund
Elect Democratic Women PAC
affiliated
Pro-Choice Majority Action
created May 1, 2026
$475,000 in pro-Connie Chan ads (May)
Dem. Majority for Israel
pro-Israel lobbying group
$37,750 in-kind polling (April)
United Democracy Project
AIPAC super PAC
$250,000 cash (April)
EDW Action Fund
Elect Democratic Women PAC
affiliated
Pro-Choice Majority Action
created May 1, 2026
$475,000 in pro-Connie
Chan ads (May)
Graphic by Kelly Waldron.
Chan has pledged not to take money from AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby. Campaign spokesperson Julie Edwards said the claim that Chan is โcarrying water for AIPAC is absurd and laughable.โ
“This is clearly a desperate attempt from our opponent to undermine our campaign because we have momentum to win on June 2,โ Edwards wrote in a statement.
“Connie has also been clear from day one of this campaign that she would not accept a dime from AIPAC, and she has stayed true to this throughout. PACs act independently of our campaign, and we would urge any organization supporting Connie to respect the very clear values she has laid out not to accept donations from AIPAC.โ
Chan has no control over PACs spending on her behalf, and she would be an unusual ally for the Israel lobby: Chan has pledged to support an arms embargo on Israel, voted with the progressive bloc on the Board of Supervisors to pass San Franciscoโs ceasefire resolution in early 2024, and names โthe genocide of the Palestinian peopleโ as a focus of her foreign policy platform.
The Russian doll-like nature of campaign finance also means it is unclear how much money, if any, from AIPAC actually ended up paying for pro-Chan ads.
Still, Chan has, overnight, become virtually joined at the hip to AIPAC among certain online leftist circles โย her face in an ominous black-and-red graphic has been plastered across the internet in the same vein as politicians who are forceful defenders of Israel and have directly accepted millions from AIPAC.
AIPAC money sent to โElect Democratic Womenโ PAC
The route starts with Pro-Choice Majority Action, a PAC created on May 1 that has spent $475,000 to cut ads for Chan in just the last 10 days.
The Pro-Choice Majority Action PAC is legally affiliated with another PAC, EDW Action Fund, meaning the two are โfinanced, maintained or controlledโ by the same individuals or group, and can pass money to each other. EDW Action Fund is an offshoot of Elect Democratic Women, which has worked to back dozens of female Democratic candidates for Congress since 2018.
But EDW Action Fund has also taken significant sums from pro-Israel groups. In April, it received $287,750 ($250,000 in cash, the rest in โin-kindโ polling) from two pro-Israel lobbying groups โ the Democratic Majority for Israel and the United Democracy Project, an AIPAC affiliate.

Elect Democratic Women, the group whose PAC directly received AIPAC funding, has supported dozens of female candidates this election cycle, including Rep. Lateefah Simon, D-Oakland (who was given โtop scoresโ on Palestinian rights by the pro-Palestine Institute for Middle East Understanding) and Oregon Rep. Maxine Dexter, D-Portland (who compared Israelโs actions in Gaza to the Holocaust before apologizing).
EDW Action Fund is part of a network of affiliates that includes a handful of other PACs, like Pro-Choice Majority Action and another focused on battleground races. The pro-Israel lobbying money sent to EDW Action Fund represents one-twentieth of the total $5 million raised by that network.
Lenny Young, an advisor with EDW Action Fund, said the network’s funds are shared among affiliated PACs. But, he wrote in a statement, “a candidate’s stance on Israel is not a criterion for garnering our support,” and that the PAC has “supported candidates who are pro-Israel, and those who are not.”
Asked whether the AIPAC donations had come with instructions to support a particular candidate, Young said, “I can’t comment on those internal conversations.”
The Pro-Choice Majority PAC was stood up on May 1, meaning its first disclosures wonโt be due until June 20, well after the primary. Committees like that are known as โpop-up PACsโ โ they can form weeks before an election and spend heavily without disclosing donors until after an election.
Pro-Israel lobbyists have taken an interest in state races. An AIPAC spokesperson told Politico in April that the group would be โlooking carefully at California racesโ to โprevent detractors of the U.S.-Israel relationship from being elected to Congress.โ
Last-minute money spend critical in final days
The Pro-Choice Majority Actionโs half-million to back Chan was significant, and badly needed: Chan has lagged in the money race compared to Wiener and centimillionaire Chakrabarti.
Wiener is a more pro-Israel candidate than either Chan or Chakrabarti. He is polling far ahead of both and is virtually guaranteed first place.
Wiener has fundraised some $4 million from individual donors, and is backed by millions more in tech-backed PAC money; Chakrabarti has poured $10 million of his own money into his campaign.
Chan, by contrast, had raised just $651,000 as of mid-May.
That changed dramatically in the last two weeks. Rep. Nancy Pelosi named Chan her favored successor on May 18, and four PACs have since spent some $600,000 in a last-ditch effort to boost Chan. The bulk of that spending came from the Pro-Choice Majority Action PAC.

Though Chan has been critical of Israel, Chakrabarti has been more forceful in condemnations. In a foreign policy Q&A with Mission Local, he said he supported the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement outright, and would halt defensive weapons like Iron Dome.
Chakrabarti also went further than Wiener and Chan by saying voters would need to โreplace a lot of the people who are in Congressโ to change the U.S.-Israeli relationship, specifically naming the โlarge Israeli lobby.โ
AROC Action, a leading San Francsico pro-Palestinian group that endorsed both Chakrabarti and Chan, said Chakrabarti had โdemonstrated particular clarity and consistency on Palestine solidarity, forcefully calling for an end to the genocide in Gaza.โ
While Wiener has been publicly agnostic on whom he prefers to face in November, it is lost on nobody that only Chakrabarti has vast personal resources โ he is worth more than $100 million โ and has pledged to spend whatever it takes to be competitive. Political strategists have pegged a Wiener vs. Chakrabarti matchup as โa fair fight.โ
Pro-Choice Majority Action, the group that took out the ad buys for Chan, has backed just three other House candidates this election cycle:
- In CA-14, Rep. Eric Swalwellโs former district in the East Bay, the PAC spent $200,000 on ads for Melissa Hernandez, a Democrat who is polling far behind frontrunner Aisha Wahab. The latter has called Israelโs actions in Gaza a genocide, while Hernandez has demurred.
- In CA-22, in the Bakersfield area, the PAC spent $100,000 on ads for Assemblymember Jasmeet Bains, who is facing off against Bernie Sanders-backed progressive Randy Villegas. After initially saying Israelโs actions qualified as genocide, Bains later walked that claim back to Politico. She has been endorsed by a pro-Israel group.
- In TX-33, between Fort Worth and Dallas, the PAC spent $100,000 on the unsuccessful bid of Julie Johnson, who was backed by AIPAC directly but lost to a representative with, curiously, a longer and more forceful past history of defending Israel.
This piece has been updated to include a statement from EDW Action Fund, and to clarify the total raised by EDW Action Fund’s affiliates.


Great, clear reporting, thank you! Hard to ignore the pop-up nature, circuitous route of the $s that end up as advertising for Chan. The fact that the two donations were 20% of EDW Action Fund’s total election cycle haul is also concerning. I guess we’ll find out more on June 20th! The message from following this election is clear: get money out of elections: self-funding, PACs of any kind…go to a small individual limit and small govt funding for each candidate (and maybe raise the signatures, $ amount to enter so the ballots aren’t so inundated with candidates for each election).
Wiener is likely to win in November but Chan in 2nd means the debate is 100% about the old YIMBY versus NIMBY bull**** that the old City Hall establishment, connected not-for-profits, and chronically online activists obsess over. If Saikat makes 2nd the debate’s 100% about Israel. That Wiener’s most vulnerable political position and he’ll be against a man with millions to spend squeezing him on it. Chan and Pelosi’s PACs will avoid Israel like the plague and focus on housing and Sunset Dunes. Wiener’s already proven victorious on this plus he’s comfortable arguing about it, that’s why Wiener wants Chan to win 2nd per ML’s reporting.
100% about Israel?
Do you really think that is the number one issue for many voters?
@John – I don’t know that @SL1953 thinks that, but it’s clear that the Chakrabarti campaign is obsessed with it. They sent me a flyer with a nuclear explosion on it, because Israel is likely to bomb Palestine or somesuch.
This is a sensible point. Not only will Chan-supporting PACs avoid the issue of Israel, so will Chan (in real time anyhow, aside from carefully crafted posted statements and timid responses to direct questions). If you read her responses in the linked Q&A article, she doesn’t use the word “Israel” once and the only confident and clear answer she gives in the category is in support of Block the Bombs.
Are false flag pac donations a thing?