United Democracy Project

United Democracy Project, a super PAC aligned with pro-Israel interests, has spent approximately $61.4 million during the 2024 election cycle, according to Federal Election Commission records. Established on January 3, 2022, the organization operates as a nonpartisan entity dedicated to supporting candidates who advocate for a strong U.S.-Israel alliance. Its efforts have been concentrated primarily on House primary races, where it has invested substantial resources to influence outcomes. The super PAC's activities are part of a broader strategy by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which has long played a central role in shaping pro-Israel advocacy in Washington. AIPAC, founded in the 1950s, traditionally avoided direct contributions to individual candidates' campaigns. However, in December 2021, the organization announced plans to launch two new political action committees, a regular PAC and a super PAC, marking a shift toward more active electoral engagement. The AIPAC PAC, established on December 15, 2021, became the largest pro-Israel PAC in the country, surpassing other prominent groups such as the Joint Action Committee for Public Affairs and JStreetPAC. While the AIPAC PAC is restricted to contributing up to $5,000 per election to a candidate's campaign, the super PAC, United Democracy Project, operates under different rules. It is permitted to raise and spend unlimited sums of money to advocate for or against federal candidates, provided these expenditures are classified as "independent expenditures" by the Federal Election Commission. Both entities are required to disclose their donors, ensuring transparency in their financial operations. During the 2026 cycle, United Democracy Project has raised over $104 million, significantly exceeding the $87.1 million it collected in the previous cycle. Of this amount, approximately $61.4 million was spent, with a large portion allocated to independent expenditures aimed at influencing Democratic House candidates. Key contributors to the super PAC include Paul Singer, co-CEO of Elliott Management; Blair Frank, a portfolio manager; Marc Rowan, a businessman; and Haim Saban, a media proprietor and investor. As of June 30, the organization had spent roughly $52.5 million, with over $27.9 million designated for independent expenditures. The super PAC's focus on House primary races has included notable investments in several key contests. For instance, it spent about $5 million supporting Melissa Conyears-Ervin, a Democrat running in Illinois’ 7th Congressional District, although she ultimately lost her primary on March 17. Conversely, the organization invested more than $1 million in favor of Adrian Boafo, who won the Democratic primary in Maryland’s 5th District on June 23. Additionally, United Democracy Project spent over $3 million opposing Rep. Thomas Massie in Kentucky’s 4th District, where he faced off against Ed Gallrein. Massie lost the Republican primary on May 19, though his opponent, Gallrein, received nearly $500,000 in support from the super PAC. The race between Massie and Gallrein was highlighted as one of the most expensive House primary contests in history, with over $9 million spent by pro-Israel interest groups alone. According to Politico, the super PAC's spokesperson, Patrick Dorton, described Massie as "the most anti-Israel Republican in the House." This characterization underscores the intensity of the ideological battle within the congressional race. In another contest, United Democracy Project spent over $2 million opposing Tom Malinowski, a Democrat who lost a special primary in New Jersey’s 11th District on February 5. The outcome of this race, won by progressive candidate Analicia Mejia, reportedly caused frustration among some centrist Democrats, as noted by Politico. To obscure its involvement in certain races, the super PAC has utilized pop-up and pass-through PACs to shield more than 40 percent of its spending across primaries in both parties for the 2026 cycle, according to Politico’s analysis. This tactic raises questions about the extent of transparency in the organization's operations.