The Democratic U.S. Senate primary debate in Michigan saw candidates Abdul El-Sayed and U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens engage in sharp exchanges, frequently pivoting from policy differences to disputes over campaign funding and external spending.
On healthcare, El-Sayed advocated for a single-payer national health insurance program, framing it as a departure from the status quo that Stevens, he suggested, represented. El-Sayed, a former public health official, contrasted this with Stevens’ approach.
Stevens, representing Michigan’s 11th Congressional District since 2019, highlighted her record as a "workhorse" delivering results for the state. She cited her involvement in President Obama’s 2009 auto industry crisis task force and her support for legislation promoting semiconductor manufacturing and STEM education in Michigan schools.
During the July 7 debate, hosted by WOOD-TV Channel 8 in Grand Rapids, the candidates also scrutinized each other’s funding sources.
El-Sayed raised concerns about a group called Center Forward paying for a trip for Stevens and her mother to Portugal, questioning what was exchanged for the sponsorship. In June 2024, Stevens was part of a delegation of lawmakers who traveled to Lisbon, Portugal, on a trip funded by Center Forward. This organization, supported in part by corporate interests, states its aim is to promote "centrist" politics. The five-day trip, according to an ethics disclosure form, included policy meetings and travel, with flights, accommodation, and meals costing approximately $15,500 per person. Center Forward indicated that meetings covered topics such as healthcare, trade, clean energy, and national security. The trip included both Democrats and Republicans. Riley Kilburg, executive director of Center Forward, stated that participants were not asked for any promises or commitments in return, emphasizing the organization’s role in providing information and fostering relationships to aid effective governance, rather than lobbying or endorsing legislation.
Stevens countered by pointing to a super PAC supporting El-Sayed, which she stated is run by his father-in-law and has spent millions of dollars on his behalf. El-Sayed’s father-in-law is a significant donor to Fighting for Michigan PAC, a super PAC established in September to support El-Sayed’s campaign. However, the PAC asserts it is managed by political strategists, not El-Sayed’s relative. Super PACs are independent expenditure-only committees that can raise and spend unlimited funds to support or oppose candidates, but they cannot contribute directly to campaigns or coordinate spending with them. Jukaku Tayeb, identified as El-Sayed’s father-in-law, is the second-largest donor to the PAC, contributing $200,000 out of the $478,125 raised by the end of March. The PAC announced in June a "multi-million-dollar independent expenditure campaign" to elect El-Sayed and had spent over $1.28 million as of July 4. The PAC is managed by political strategists Connor Farrell and Hannah Fertig. Farrell stated that the claim of Tayeb running the super PAC is false and that he has no involvement in its strategy or operations. Michael Beckel, director of money in politics reform at Issue One, noted that while major donors can sometimes influence strategy, their involvement may also end with the donation. He added that when a family member is a significant funder of a super PAC supporting a politician, questions about the separation between candidates and outside groups can arise. Stevens’ campaign has not provided evidence of Tayeb’s direct involvement in the PAC’s operations. Beckel also commented that if a donor contributes a substantial sum without directing its spending, it would be a stretch to say they run the super PAC.
El-Sayed also claimed that "Big AI has huge super PACs" funding his opponent. Currently, two primary artificial intelligence industry super PACs, Leading the Future and Public Action First, are involved in the 2026 midterms. Neither of these, nor any other major AI-industry super PACs, have reported spending in the Michigan Senate race. Stevens has received corporate PAC donations from Microsoft and Google, totaling $7,500. These corporate PAC donations are distinct from super PAC expenditures, as corporate PACs are funded by voluntary contributions from eligible employees and can donate directly to campaigns up to a limited amount per election.
Stevens asserted that the Republican Party is spending money to support El-Sayed’s campaign, believing he would be a weaker opponent for Mike Rogers. The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) released an ad on June 25 criticizing El-Sayed’s policy stances and referencing his endorsement by Bernie Sanders. The exact amount spent on this ad is not publicly known. Experts suggest the timing of the ad, released during the primary, indicates a Republican preference for El-Sayed as the Democratic nominee over Stevens, potentially to gain an early advantage in attacking him. The practice of external parties intervening in primaries through advertising is not uncommon, often involving messaging designed to portray candidates as too extreme.
El-Sayed stated that AIPAC has spent tens of millions of dollars on attack ads against him or misleading ads about Stevens’ record. The United Democracy Project, a super PAC associated with the American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC), has indeed spent millions supporting Stevens and opposing El-Sayed in the Michigan Senate race. Recent filings show expenditures exceeding $10.9 million on advertising that promotes Stevens’ work and criticizes El-Sayed. El-Sayed’s campaign also pointed to the Center for Democratic Priorities, a pro-Stevens group that has spent over $5 million on advertising and is reportedly connected to AIPAC through shared vendors and personnel.