Vermonters Continue Backlash Against Lawmakers Who Took a Free Ride to Israel: An Anatomy of Public Censure

Notably absent from the tightly controlled schedule was any engagement with Palestinian perspectives.

Oct 01, 2025

The “50 States, One Israel” Junket: Context and Controversy

In mid-September 2025, a bipartisan delegation of five Vermont state legislators embarked on a weeklong, all-expenses-paid trip to Israel.

This journey ignited a significant political controversy, revealing deep ideological divisions within the state and prompting serious questions about legislative ethics and accountability. The lawmakers were participants in the “50 States, One Israel” conference, an event fully organized and funded by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

While intended to demonstrate unwavering American support, the trip’s timing and its carefully managed agenda turned it into a focal point for intense public condemnation, grassroots protest, and extensive media scrutiny across Vermont.

The Delegation and the Conference’s Design

The Vermont delegation consisted of three Democrats—Representatives Sarah “Sarita” Austin of Colchester, Matt Birong of Vergennes, and Will Greer of Bennington—and two Republicans, Representatives Gina Galfetti of Barre and James Gregoire of Fairfield, according to Seven Days. They were part of a larger group of approximately 250 state legislators from all 50 U.S. states who attended the conference, which its organizers billed as the largest-ever delegation of American elected officials to visit the country, as noted by Wikipedia.

The characterization of the trip as a “junket” became a central aspect of the ensuing controversy. The Israeli government, specifically through its Ministry of Foreign Affairs, covered all associated costs for the lawmakers, including international airfare, five-star lodging in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, in-country transportation, meals, and guided programming, as reported by Seven Days. This arrangement, while defended by some participants as standard for diplomatic visits, was perceived by critics as a direct attempt by a foreign government to influence state-level American politicians, according to a YouTube short from Vermont Public.

The Stated Purpose and a Curated Itinerary

Ostensibly, the conference aimed to strengthen ties between the United States and Israel and provide American lawmakers with “firsthand insight into the complexities and opportunities facing Israel today,” according to Melanie Miller’s news. However, the itinerary was meticulously curated by the Israeli government, presenting a specific and largely one-sided narrative of the ongoing conflict. The schedule included high-level meetings with top Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Isaac Herzog, and Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar, as reported by the Jerusalem Post.

Participants were taken on guided tours of significant cultural and political sites, such as the Western Wall in Jerusalem, and to emotionally charged locations like the site of the Nova Music Festival, which was targeted by Hamas militants on October 7, 2023, Seven Days reported. A key public relations event involved the legislators planting 50 trees in the southern city of Ofakim, one for each U.S. state, to symbolize the U.S.-Israel relationship and honor Israeli victims of the October 7th attack. This seemingly innocuous photo opportunity, widely circulated on social media, became a potent symbol for critics who saw it as an act of complicity with the Israeli government’s policies, as highlighted by The Lens.

Notably absent from the tightly controlled schedule was any engagement with Palestinian perspectives. The American delegations were not offered any opportunity to meet with Palestinian officials, independent human rights observers, or residents of Gaza, as observed by The Vermont Political Observer. This curated experience ensured that the lawmakers, in the words of one observer, only got to “see things the Israeli government wanted them to see.”

The Political Firestorm: A Trip at Odds with Vermont’s Federal Stance

The public outcry against the trip cannot be fully understood without considering its extraordinary timing. The legislators’ participation in a state-sponsored tour of solidarity occurred in the very same week that an independent United Nations commission released a report concluding that Israel was committing genocide in Gaza, according to Seven Days. This international finding provided a stark backdrop, immediately framing the junket in the most contentious terms possible.

The political situation for the Vermont delegation became acutely volatile when, the day after the UN report’s release, the state’s entire federal delegation—Senators Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch, and Representative Becca Balint—unanimously used the word “genocide” for the first time to describe Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, Seven Days reported. This unified and powerful condemnation from Vermont’s highest-ranking elected officials created a profound and politically untenable dissonance. Representative Balint, the granddaughter of a man murdered in the Holocaust, penned a widely cited op-ed declaring, “America has a moral responsibility to own our complicity in this genocide and to use our power to stop it,” according to Seven Days.

This created a jarring “split-screen” effect in Vermont politics: while the state’s voices in Washington D.C. were leveling the gravest possible charge against the Israeli government, five of its state-level representatives were in Jerusalem participating in a public relations event sponsored by that same government. This “discordant” reality, as one political observer termed it according to The Vermont Political Observer, was not merely a matter of poor timing; it was a fundamental clash of political and moral positions that provided the primary fuel for the widespread public backlash.

An Itemized Breakdown of the Public Backlash

The backlash against the five legislators manifested across multiple platforms and from various corners of Vermont society. It was not a single campaign but a multi-pronged wave of grassroots censure. Here is an itemized breakdown of the pushback:

1. On-Campus Silent Protest:
- Location: Bennington College, the alma mater of Representative Will Greer.
- Action: Students and members of the North Bennington community held a silent demonstration in Lincoln Square, holding signs that, according to The Lens, condemned both “Israel’s genocide and Greer’s visit.”
2. Formal Condemnation by Advocacy Organizations:
- Vermonters for Justice in Palestine (VJP): Wafic Faour of VJP characterized the all-expenses-paid junket as cynical “lobbying for Israel to clean up the image of Israel here,” asserting that such an effort “is not going to work for Vermonters,” according to a Vermont Public video.
- Jewish Voice for Peace VT/NH (JVP): This organization, representing nearly 1,000 anti-Zionist Jewish Vermonters, issued a statement declaring they were “appalled, saddened and angry.” According to The Rake Vermont, JVP framed the lawmakers as having been “recruited and paid for by the State of Israel to engage with rather than sanction these ongoing war crimes.”
3. Criticism in Local Media and Letters to the Editor:
- Addison Independent: This newspaper, serving Representative Matt Birong’s district, reported on constituent criticism and published letters to the editor. According to the paper, one writer, Ariel Bolles, expressed being “incredibly disappointed,” while another, Laura Fair, pointedly asked, “By what rationale did Birong plant a Vermont state flag on occupied Palestinian land last week?”
4. Digital Dissent and Online Activism:
- The Vermont Subreddit: According to Seven Days, this online forum on Reddit was a key driver of the backlash. A post titled “50 States One Israel: Vermont State Legislators Take All-Expenses-Paid Trip to Israel” served as a catalyst for public awareness. The original poster on Reddit wrote, “I believe Vermonters have a right to know,” and the forum became a hub for collective investigation and criticism.
5. Direct Constituent Rebuke:
- Bennington College Students: The reaction against Representative Greer was deeply personal. A senior who had voted for him told The Lens, “That is not who I thought I was voting for.” Another student, Dev Wernik, labeled Greer a “willing propaganda pawn for a genocide,” adding that the trip leaves a “stain for all of history.”
- Constituent Feedback to Other Legislators: Representative Sarah “Sarita” Austin acknowledged on Facebook that she had received messages of “anger and disbelief” from constituents, as reported by Vermont Public.
6. Peer Criticism from Outside Vermont:
- Ohio State Senator Beth Liston: A fellow Democratic legislator who initially accepted the invitation but later backed out provided a powerful critique. According to The Vermont Political Observer, she wrote on social media that she did not want to be “used as a tool,” stating, “I WAS the propaganda in this sponsored trip.”

The Legislators Under Fire: Justifications, Deflections, and Apologies

Faced with a growing storm of public criticism, the five Vermont legislators responded not with a unified defense, but with a fractured and often contradictory set of justifications, apologies, and deflections.

Representative Will Greer (D-Bennington): The Apology and Dialogue Defense

As the target of a campus protest, Representative Will Greer was the most public and conciliatory in his response. He explicitly stated that his participation was not in support of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government or “the genocide taking place in Gaza,” according to Seven Days. He argued that he attended to “engage in constructive dialogue” and offered an apology “for the optics that this has caused,” according to The Lens.

Representative Matt Birong (D-Vergennes): The Defiant Counter-Narrative

In stark contrast, Representative Matt Birong adopted a confrontational stance. According to The Rake Vermont, he justified his attendance as a mission to “see things with my own eyes” and counter “manipulated” information. He directly challenged the “genocide” label, citing Palestinian population growth, and praised the Israeli military’s conduct.

Representatives Austin, Gregoire, and Galfetti: The Minimize and Localize Defense

The remaining three legislators adopted a more muted strategy. Representative Sarah “Sarita” Austin acknowledged receiving messages of “anger and disbelief” but offered a neutral defense of the trip as a learning mission, according to Vermont Public. The two Republicans, James Gregoire and Gina Galfetti, both claimed that the response from their own constituents had been “largely positive,” an approach that attempts to invalidate broader criticism by framing it as irrelevant to their local accountability, as reported by Seven Days.

The divergence in these responses, particularly between Democrats Greer and Birong, prevented the delegation from presenting a consistent message, ensuring that the controversy would be defined by a series of conflicting justifications.

Media Scrutiny and the Propaganda Question

Central to the public backlash was the narrative that the conference was not a diplomatic mission but a sophisticated propaganda exercise. This frame was substantiated by the Israeli government’s own explicit articulation of the event’s purpose. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the lawmakers their presence was an “active effort to counter attempts to besiege Israel,” according to The Jerusalem Post. Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar openly called on them to combat the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement back in their home states, according to Wikipedia. This alignment between the accusations of critics and the stated goals of the sponsors left the lawmakers with no credible defense against the charge that they had willingly participated in a propaganda campaign.

Broader Implications: Eroding Trust and the Politics of Influence

The controversy carries implications that extend far beyond the immediate political fallout. It has sparked a necessary public conversation in Vermont about the ethics of state legislators accepting all-expenses-paid trips from foreign governments, especially when those governments are accused of major human rights violations. The raw and emotional language from constituents—using words like “betrayal” and “disgusting”—points to a tangible erosion of trust that may prove difficult to heal.

Ultimately, the Vermont controversy serves as a microcosm of the deep and growing divisions within American society over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The trip was intended to send a message of unified American support from Vermont to Israel, but the more powerful and lasting message was the one sent from Vermonters back to their own state house, revealing a community deeply fractured by a conflict thousands of miles away.