Aurora Stuski
R · U.S. House, PA-4 · Tier 2/3
Tier 2/3, between “Mainstream pro-Israel” and “Pro-Israel, critical”
Her campaign posts cover foreign policy, student loans, food safety, law enforcement, faith and civics, child protection and state issues such as a water-utility merger and attacks on Gov. Shapiro. Asked in iVoterGuide’s 2026 general-election questionnaire whether the U.S. relationship with Israel is important, Stuski answered: “Absolutely! National security: Israel is a major U.S. security partner in the Middle East. The partnership helps the U.S. address threats from Iran. The United States should maintain a strong relationship with Israel because Israel is an important security, intelligence, technology, and economic partner in the Middle East, while the U.S. should continue to have its own independent foreign policy and hold all partners accountable to American laws and interests.” In an October 10, 2026 post on her site she wrote that Israel “has a legitimate right to protect its people from terrorism” but that “supporting Israel’s security does not require endorsing every action taken by its government. I do not condone much of what has happened in Gaza, and I believe the United States must carefully evaluate how its financial assistance, weapons transfers, and diplomatic support are being used.” She would “distinguish defensive systems and intelligence cooperation from offensive weapons transfers,” “support humanitarian assistance for innocent civilians” and “reassess assistance when its purposes, conditions, or results cannot be adequately justified.”
A 2/3, on a thin record: one questionnaire answer and one campaign post. Her October 10, 2026 post says Israel “has a legitimate right to protect its people from terrorism,” but that “supporting Israel’s security does not require endorsing every action taken by its government. I do not condone much of what has happened in Gaza.” She would “distinguish defensive systems and intelligence cooperation from offensive weapons transfers,” apply U.S. law on “arms transfers and human rights” and “reassess assistance when its purposes, conditions, or results cannot be adequately justified.” That criticizes the war’s conduct in her own words, with aid conditioned under existing law and offensive transfers set apart. But she names nothing she would withhold, the plank opens with Israel’s right to protect its people, and her iVoterGuide answer calls the relationship important: “Absolutely!” No vote, bill or other act on Israel is on record. Counter-case: 3, if setting offensive transfers apart reads as Block the Bombs in substance; 1/2, if “reassess” is boilerplate beside the right-to-protect line; and two statements are a thin base for any rating.
Open the full card, with votes, money and every source, on elect26 →
elect26 places 2026 midterm candidates on a six-tier spectrum, from 1 (most pro-Israel) to 6 (most critical of Israel).