Fighting an anti-Israel movement

Nevada lawmakers must stand against anti-Semitism

It isn’t often that a state has a chance to take a strong moral stand while at the same time safeguarding its economic interests. Senate Bill 26 would do just that, putting Nevada at the forefront of states countering the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

As introduced, SB26 would be one of the most aggressive in its repudiation of this movement.

It would require companies to certify in writing that they are not participating in economic action against Israel in order to contract with the state and local governments. It would prevent state entities from investing in companies boycotting Israel, making no distinction between Israel and Israeli-controlled territories. Only the constitutionally mandated state pension fund would be exempt from the divestment requirement; it would still be required to report on any BDS-related holdings.

As a democratic and increasingly capitalist society, Israel is a natural ally of the United States. But it’s the benefits of being the third freest economy in the region — behind only the UAE and Qatar — that come into play here.

The measure makes specific reference to the trade benefits of maintaining a relationship with Israel, while referencing longstanding Arab efforts to economically isolate the Jewish state.

Nevada’s desert climate makes it an ideal partner for many Israeli initiatives, notes Dillon Hosier, national director for State Government Affairs for the IsraeliAmerican Coalition for Action, an advocacy group for the IsraeliAmerican community that also works for stronger ties between the two countries.

WaterStart, a water research and technology cluster in Las Vegas, has been looking to Israel for solutions in groundwater cleanup, leak detection and conservation management. Last December, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce hosted a joint US/Israel Water Summit at the Bellagio. Israel also has a “memorandum of understanding” with the state’s Desert Research Institute.

Said Hosier, “You don’t really have the strong anti-Israel, antiSemitic organizations in Nevada. In California, Jewish Voice for Peace and CAIR had a top legislative priority to defeat the bill. Those organizations don’t really exist in Nevada.” Elsewhere, Code Pink has engaged in anti-Israel activity that many construed as anti-Semitic.

In other states, opposition from civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, has focused on boycotts as protected speech. This is a red herring. Nothing in the law would prevent individuals or companies from avoiding doing business in or with Israel.

Also, the voices of those who oppose the Jewish state, from college campuses to Main Street, Nevada, would not be silenced.

That is a courtesy the BDS movement does not extend to the pro-Israel community. The university system of our neighbors to the west has become the shame of academia. University of California schools are notorious hotbeds of anti-Semitic activity, according to studies conducted by the antiSemitism watchdog group AMCHA Initiative and the Jewish newspaper The Algemeiner.

Simply put, there is no reason why the Nevada taxpayer should be an accessory to anti-Semitism or complicit in the boycotting of this close ally of the United States. If Israel is singled out for protection under this bill, it’s only because Israel has been singled out for economic isolation by those who oppose a Jewish state.

Nevada has a chance to do well by its citizens while doing right by American values. It should seize the opportunity. Joshua Sharf is a fellow with the Haym Salomon Center and head of the PERA project at the Independence Institute. Follow him @joshuasharf.