How much has AIPAC spent against Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed? And why?

xwhatsapp-strokecopylinkgoogleAdd Al Jazeera on GoogleinfoUS Senate candidates Abdul El-Sayed, left, and US Representative Haley Stevens in a TV debate in Southfield, Michigan, July 27, 2026 [Robin Buckson/Detroit News via AP, Pool]By Ali HarbPublished On 2 Aug 20262 Aug 2026Dearborn, Michigan – “Down with AIPAC,” the crowd chanted at a campaign rally for Democratic Senate hopeful Abdul El-Sayed in a suburb of Detroit.

AIPAC – the American Israel Public Affairs Committee – has become the main topic of conversation in the Democratic primary in Michigan, which analysts say could affect the party’s approach to Israel for years to come.

Michigan state legislator Alabas Farhat vowed at the rally in the Detroit suburb of Dearborn on Friday that voters would make the pro-Israel group “burn” millions of dollars by electing El-Sayed to the US Senate.

“The status quo has told us for a long time that we don’t have money for modern schools; we don’t have money for clean water to drink, for health care, for affordable housing,” Farhat told the rally.

“But when we call up money to go and bomb children in Gaza, to do an ethnic cleansing campaign in South Lebanon – this administration seems to find that money.”

Several speakers, including Congresswomen Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, also took to the stage but the name of El-Sayed’s opponent in Tuesday’s election, Congresswoman Haley Stevens, was hardly mentioned.

Instead, AIPAC – which is breaking records in campaign spending to defeat candidates critical of Israeli policies, such as El-Sayed – was repeatedly brought up, booed and denounced.

El-Sayed, a progressive epidemiologist and former public health official, is running against Stevens, a four-term Congress member, to replace retiring Democratic Senator Gary Peters. The winner will face former Congressman Mike Rogers, the likely Republican nominee, in November.

But exactly how much have AIPAC and other special-interest groups spent in Michigan, and where is the money coming from?

Here, Al Jazeera examines the financial state of the race touted as the most important of this primary cycle.

Federal Election Commission (FEC) records show that AIPAC and other political action committees (PACs) have spent more than $54m to help Stevens.

A dark-money group called the Center for Democratic Priorities has also spent about $6.5m on ads supporting Stevens, according to local media reports – increasing the grand total to more than $60m.

The Center for Democratic Priorities has not reported its spending to the FEC.

AIPAC’s election arm, United Democracy Project (UDP), has spent north of $30m on the race – $30,638,639.63 to be exact – as of Saturday evening.

The amount represents a record for AIPAC, which has been using its enormous spending power to derail candidates who oppose unconditional aid to Israel.

AIPAC directs UDP and is also the largest donor to the political action committee (PAC).

Of the $100m UDP has raised this election cycle, $30m came from AIPAC, which operates as a social welfare nonprofit, making it difficult to track its donors.

The tactic of funnelling funds from nonprofits to election PACs to help influence US elections is known as “dark money”.

Aside from AIPAC, UDP is largely funded by wealthy pro-Israel advocates, including:

The other $30m that flooded the race with pro-Stevens and anti-El-Sayed ads has mostly come from PACs that are funded by other PACs and dark money groups, which have not fully disclosed their donors.

It’s like a Russian doll – a PAC within a PAC within a PAC within a social welfare nonprofits – dark money group.

AIPAC has previously used shell PACs to conceal its spending in Democratic primaries.

The largest non-AIPAC spender in the race is a newly formed group called A Stronger Michigan with more than $17m. The PAC has been mostly bankrolled by a nonprofit called Center Forward, whose stated mission is to foster partisanship.

A Stronger Michigan has also received funds from another PAC that was established this year, Michigan Forward 2026.

In turn, FEC records show, Michigan Forward 2026 was funded by businessman Daniel Lubetzky; the American Chemistry Council, a trade association for the chemical industry; and American Foundation for Good Governance, another nonprofit.

Separately, a PAC called Center Forward Committee, also linked to the nonprofit Center Forward, spent around $900,000 in the race. That group has received funds from corporate donors, including Chevron and the United Health Care group.

That’s not all. There was yet another new PAC, Unite to Win, that came in with nearly $4m to help elect Stevens. That group lists Democracy Matters, a PAC that has not reported any major fundraising or spending this year, as its sole donor.

These PACs operate separately from the candidates themselves and they are barred by law from coordinating with the campaigns.

PAC-funded ads are known as independent expenditures.

The campaigns raise money from individual donations, capped at $3,500 per person per election.

Special interest groups can still divert money to campaigns outside independent expenditure by encouraging supporters and their family members to donate to the candidate.

El-Sayed has outraised Stevens with direct campaign donations of $14.5m, compared to her $11.9M.

Yes, the progressive Democrat has received around $3.5m in independent expenditure support, a fraction of the amount Stevens received.

The largest spender in that camp has been Fighting for Michigan, a group funded by progressive advocates and pro-Palestine donors.

The PAC has received donations from the Institute for Middle East Understanding, Inc, a nonprofit.

El-Sayed’s father-in-law donated $300,000 to the group. Saikat Chakrabarti, a progressive advocate who ran for Congress unsuccessfully in California in June, also gave Fighting for Michigan $250,000.

Some labour unions and progressive groups have used their own PACs for modest campaigning, like phone banking, to help elect El-Sayed.

In recent weeks, Stevens has dismissed the millions spent by AIPAC on her behalf and repeatedly avoided addressing questions about the group, which she has thanked in the past.

“I don’t think there’s much difference between super PACs going in for Abdul or super PACs going in for me. We have a problem with campaign finance reform in this country,” she said during a recent debate.

El-Sayed’s supporters were quick to point out that the difference is more than $56m.

Despite appearing to distance herself from the spending on behalf of her campaign, a section on Stevens’ website labelled “media” seems to provide talking points for ads by AIPAC and PACs.

“Black Democratic primary voters statewide should read and see in their mailboxes and on YouTube how Haley served as chief of staff to President [Barack] Obama’s auto rescue,” it reads.

The website also makes available silent video of Stevens interacting with voters that appears intended for TV commercials.

The backing Stevens is receiving from AIPAC, at a time when Israel’s support amongst Democrats is at an all-time low, has been a central talking point for El-Sayed’s campaign against the congresswoman.

The progressive doctor has argued that while he would represent the people of Michigan, Stevens is beholden to her donors, namely AIPAC.

“Donald Trump is not himself the disease; he’s just the first symptom of the disease of our politics,” El-Sayed said on Friday.

“The disease is this system that allows billionaires and corporations and special interests like AIPAC to buy and sell politicians to rig the system against us.”

At a debate last month, El-Sayed noted that Stevens had voted against cutting off funding to Israel, linking the policy to AIPAC’s intervention in the Senate contest.

“Just last week, our friend here voted to send $3.3bn of your tax dollars to a foreign government,” El-Sayed said. “That is the pro quo that comes with the quid of $30m spent by AIPAC.”

AIPAC – which has been an uncompromising advocate for the genocidal war on Gaza and the bombing campaign in Iran – rejects the notion that it is a lobby group that serves a foreign government. Instead, the organisation presents itself as a coalition of engaged Americans who view a close US-Israel alliance as beneficial for both countries.

“As proud, pro-Israel Americans, we will never apologise for participating in the political process and standing up to those who undermine our shared values,” the group said in a recent email to supporters that listed the Senate race in Michigan as “critical”.

Palestinian rights supporters say if El-Sayed – who is leading in the polls – manages to pull off a victory against Stevens and AIPAC, it would be a major blow for pro-Israel advocacy in the US.

“Progress is happening. People are waking up. The truth is coming,” Vivian Moghni, an El-Sayed supporter in Dearborn, told Al Jazeera.

While many progressives have been elected to the House of Representatives in overwhelmingly Democratic districts, the rise of El-Sayed in Michigan – a diverse state of more than 10m people who voted for Trump in 2016 and 2024 – could prove to be a political earthquake for the Israel question within the Democratic Party.

The Michigan Senate race could also decide which party controls the chamber after the general election in November.