Staff Writer

Though the new pro-Israel political action committee J Street made headlines during the election season, many observers question whether it could ever rival the influence of the American Israel Political Affairs Committee.

"There's a huge difference [between the two], like comparing a gas station to a supermarket," said Ron Halber, the executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council.

J Street garnered attention throughout the year as an outsider organization with a dovish view of American-Israel relations that some believe contrasts with the more pro-establishment, right-leaning position of AIPAC.

Portraying the two as competitors is problematic, however, since J Street is primarily a PAC and, therefore, capable of donating money directly to politicians. AIPAC, on the other hand, is a lobbying institution and does not endorse any elected officials. Both organizations claim to be bipartisan.

"If you are asking me if J Street's contributions to a handful of elected officials is going to pressure AIPAC into alternating its stance ... the answer is a flat 'No,' " said Halber.

Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street's executive director, said the two organizations are not necessarily at odds with one another.

"We have a different agenda; ours is a policy agenda," he explained, adding that J Street's real fight is with "the neo-cons" and those on the far right "who think that any form of compromise and pursuit of peace is actually counter to Israel's best interest."

Though it made waves with its fund-raising prowess, J Street also has an advocacy arm that functions similarly to AIPAC; that is, lobbying lawmakers to enact particular policies. Ben-Ami said he expects J Street to focus on this aspect when the new Congress convenes.

"We will have lobbying in person and in district by key political donors and activists, but we don't have the infrastructure and mechanism obviously to do it to the degree" that AIPAC does, he explained.

For Ben-Ami, "it's a question of priority" when searching for differences between J Street and AIPAC's approach. "Our agenda starts with ending Israel's conflict with its neighbors," he said, adding that J Street uses many of the same "approaches and tactics" as AIPAC in working to accomplish this goal.

AIPAC pushes mainly for increased military and economic aid to Israel. It works also for tougher antiterrorist policies, sharing American security technologies with Israel and preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America and a member of AIPAC's executive board, says J Street's influence is minimal and questions why a reporter would "make a big story about an organization with a $1 million budget."

He also says that J Street and AIPAC are closer in terms of policy than some realize.

"Right now on all the main issues, AIPAC and J Street are aligned," Klein said, pointing to an agreement on the dismantlement of Israeli settlements, aid to the Palestinian Authority and the withdrawal of Israelis from the Gaza Strip.

Any disparity, Klein explained, is likely to show up in J Street's willingness to push Israel toward tough peace concessions.

Ben-Ami drew a similar distinction, saying that while it's important to endorse all pro-Israel agendas, "there is a sense of urgency to J Street" that AIPAC lacks. "The reason we've come out of the box so strong ... is that there's a group of pro-Israel activists who feel a deep sense of urgency [to resolve Arab conflicts]. I think that's a big difference" from AIPAC and other organizations.

M.J. Rosenberg, the director of policy analysis at the Israel Policy Forum, which has worked with J Street, said the two groups clearly differ in philosophy and self-identity. "J Street thinks the best way to help Israel is to secure peace," said Rosenberg, a former AIPAC staffer, "and AIPAC believes the best way to help is to preserve the status quo."

In other words, Rosenberg explained, "J Street's goal is to encourage the American leadership to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict once and for all and AIPAC isn't particularly interested with this process."

The disparity is mainly one of rhetoric: While J Street publically pushes for a specific policy, AIPAC does not, according to those interviewed.

"There is an alphabet soup of ideologically motivated organizations in the wider Jewish community ... [and] those groups are very different than AIPAC because what AIPAC does is not prescriptive, and it's not narrowly ideological," said Josh Block, an AIPAC spokesperson. There is "respect for the right of the people of Israel to democratically elect whomever they choose ... and [AIPAC] works in a bipartisan way here at home."

Klein disagrees, saying, "It's not true that [AIPAC] supports whatever Israel does. They do like to say that" publicly, but in reality they do not.

Discussing why AIPAC will remain "in a class by itself" in the ranks of lobbyists, Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) said the organization has been "very effective in avoiding partisan divisions" or interfering in battles between the president and congress. Cardin explained that while smaller pro-Israel organizations, such as J Street, "have their niche and their effectiveness on a particular issue ... AIPAC has a lasting presence in Washington and around the country."