WASHINGTON — Rep. Benjamin Gilman, the only Jewish Republican in the House and a strong advocate for Israel during his stint as chair of the House’s International Relations Committee, may be forced to step down from his post due to term limits.
The New York lawmaker is attempting to gain a waiver from the Republicans’ six-year term limit on committee chairs. However, GOP leaders re-emphasized their commitment to the limit during a caucus last week. That leaves Gilman and several other veteran lawmakers with few options for retaining power on the committees they have led.
“Mr. Gilman has had conversations with the leadership about what is going to happen next year,” said Lester Munson, spokesman for the committee. He declined further comment.
Israeli policy analysts, who see Gilman’s departure from the chair as a key loss, describe him as a consistent, effective and thoughtful voice on behalf of Israel. Even if he gives up his post, however, no real shift in policy on Israel is expected by analysts, who believe the committee will still make Israel a priority.
“We think [Gilman] will continue to find ways to be an activist on pro-Israel issues and his influence on the committee will still be very strong,” said Kenneth Bricker, spokesman for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
Gilman became committee chairman in 1995 after Republicans gained control of both houses of Congress. He had previously served as Republican leader of a Middle East subcommittee, which was dissolved so Gilman could handle the region’s issues as committee chair. There is speculation that the Middle East subcommittee could be formed again as a platform for Gilman.
Munson said he is unaware of any plans to revive the Middle East subcommittee, but said the congressman is seeking to maintain his leadership role on Middle East issues.
“It was very clear and very obvious that Benjamin Gilman was a warrior for issues of concern to the pro-Israel community,” Bricker said. “In that role, he will be missed.”
Gilman gained wide support for his pro-Israel viewpoints and actions.
“We might differ on interpretations of what is in Israel’s best interest, but I don t think anyone can fault the basic intent of what he is trying to do,” said Lewis Roth, assistant executive director of Americans for Peace Now.
Gilman’s hardline approach toward the Palestinians has sometimes fallen to the right of the Clinton administration and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Gilman has been more skeptical of the Palestinian leadership and has tried to hold it accountable for commitments made in previous peace accords.
Gilman spearheaded legislation this fall, opposed by Clinton, that would have cut off aid to the Palestinian Authority if it unilaterally declared a Palestinian state. That bill, which passed the House, had the support of several Jewish groups. Gilman was also seen as a staunch supporter of reparations for victims of Mideast violence.
His support for Israel, however, has been seen by some as a possible detriment to the peace process.
In contention for the committee chair are three senior members of the panel: Reps. Jim Leach of Iowa, Henry Hyde of Illinois and Doug Bereuter of Nebraska.
All three have been generally supportive of pro-Israel legislation, especially foreign aid, Bricker said. Hyde and Leach co-sponsored legislation in 1995 to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv. Bereuter voted against that legislation, but has supported other bills that recognized Jerusalem as the capital city, backed Israel on sanctions for Iraq and Iran and supported the peace process.