Below are our detailed evaluations of candidates running for Illinois Congressional District 7. Each issue has been evaluated based on candidate interviews and our independent research. See our Methodology section below for details on how we conducted these evaluations.
Given the limited ability of the rankings to capture nuances, we have included both short narrative summaries and detailed footnotes. Summaries contain a color coded bar that captures the rankings. Hover or click on bars in the summaries to view each issue and answer. The summaries appear below the Evaluation Results. You can also quickly navigate to a summary for any candidate by clicking on the candidate's name in the table or card.
How to read these evaluations
When your browser window is wide, you'll see a table. In the table, each row represents an issue we asked candidates. The columns show how each candidate responded based on our evaluation scale. On your phone or a narrow display, the table becomes a series of cards, each card showing one issue.
In some cases, the answers the candidates gave were contradicted by their public record. These inconsistencies are captured both in the footnotes and summaries. Please note that where there appeared to be no contradiction we took the candidates word at face value. Our independent research was conducted up until 1/23/2026. Included in this was research on an anti-AIPAC antisemitic misinformation campaign designed to obstruct facts on this issue from reaching Illinois Congressional District 7 constituents.
Evaluation Results
| Issue | Boykin | Collins | Conyears-Ervin | Driver | Fisher | Ford | Friedman | Hoskins | Mendoza | Showalter |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Values the Jewish community in the Democratic Party big tent | BoykinStrongly support | CollinsSupport | Conyears-ErvinStrongly support | DriverStrongly support | FisherSupport | FordStrongly support | FriedmanStrongly support | HoskinsStrongly support | MendozaNACandidate declined multiple efforts to meet with us. We carefully reviewed her web site and other available materials in the public domain. Our review gives us concern that the candidate does not value the Jewish community. | ShowalterWeakly support |
| Expresses interest and understanding of anti-Semitism | BoykinStrongly support | CollinsSupport | Conyears-ErvinStrongly support | DriverStrongly support | FisherSupport | FordStrongly support | FriedmanStrongly support | HoskinsStrongly support | MendozaNo interestCandidate's declining multiple offers to meet with us suggests candidate does not consider this an important issue in the campaign; candidate's materials show staking out an antizionist, anti-Israel position that is not open to discussion with our community despite shared values with our community on issues such as ICE. | ShowalterSupport |
| Recognizes antisemitism on the Right | BoykinStrongly support | CollinsStrongly support | Conyears-ErvinStrongly support | DriverStrongly support | FisherStrongly support | FordStrongly support | FriedmanStrongly support | HoskinsStrongly support | MendozaNAWe do not know how this candidate understands Right-wing antisemitism; none of the candidate's materials include the Jewish community as a focus of concern. | ShowalterStrongly support |
| Recognizes antisemitism on the Left | BoykinSupportBoykin expressed significant concern about far-left activists in general but didn't give specific analysis of Left-wing antisemitism. | CollinsNeutralCollins' understanding of left-wing antisemitism is unclear. See note in Collins summary (citing Ben Joravsky Show appearance on August 4, 2025). | Conyears-ErvinStrongly support | DriverStrongly support | FisherWeakly supportFisher recognizes the role of social media (rampant disinformation campaigns) in the rise in left-wing antisemitism. The candidate is open to learning more about the causes. | FordWeakly supportCandidate initially did not present an answer showing he understood left-wing antisemitism or would recognize it. However, upon discussion, the candidate felt strongly that such antisemitism is fueled by misinformation and questioned who was fostering antisemitism on the Left. The candidate expressed the need to understand this more fully and stressed his interest in learning from members of our community who are experiencing left-wing antisemitism. | FriedmanStrongly support | HoskinsStrongly support | MendozaNo interestCandidate's material includes double standards and delegitimization of Israel which we view as potentially treading in antisemitic tropes. | ShowalterNeutral |
| Prioritizes safety/security for Jewish communityPrioritizes safety and security for members of our community and will advocate for local Jewish community safety and security | BoykinStrongly support | CollinsStrongly support | Conyears-ErvinStrongly support | DriverStrongly support | FisherSupport | FordSupport | FriedmanStrongly support | HoskinsStrongly support | MendozaNANo information. | ShowalterWeakly supportLacks clear platform beyond tightening hate crime laws to cover groups including Jews. |
| Disavows blatant antisemitism that exists in Congressional District 7 | BoykinStrongly support | CollinsStrongly support | Conyears-ErvinStrongly support | DriverStrongly support | FisherSupport | FordStrongly support | FriedmanStrongly support | HoskinsStrongly support | MendozaDoes not disavowWe have seen no evidence that indicates a willingness to disavow blatant antisemitism. | ShowalterLimited support |
| Accepts Zionism as Jewish self-determinationAccepts basic definitions of Zionism as the right of the Jewish people to self-determination in a national homeland and to self-defense in that homeland | BoykinStrongly support | CollinsSupport | Conyears-ErvinSupportCandidate is a general supporter of Zionist ideals as we articulated them but is not knowledgeable about Zionism or its historical role. | DriverStrongly support | FisherNeutral | FordWeakly supportThe candidate was candid in stating not having a definition and asked us to provide one. Once given a basic definition of Zionism as a belief in the right of the Jewish people to self-determination in a national homeland, candidate endorsed it. | FriedmanStrongly support | HoskinsStrongly support | MendozaDoes not acceptInformation on candidate's webpage endorses elimination of Israel and does not recognize self-defense rights of Israel. | ShowalterSupport |
| Supports the existence of Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people | BoykinStrongly support | CollinsSupport | Conyears-ErvinStrongly support | DriverStrongly support | FisherSupport | FordStrongly support | FriedmanStrongly support | HoskinsStrongly support | MendozaDoes not acceptInformation on candidate's webpage endorses elimination of Israel and does not recognize self-defense rights of Israel. | ShowalterSupport |
| Appreciates the complexity of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict | BoykinStrongly appreciates | CollinsAppreciates | Conyears-ErvinStrongly appreciates | DriverStrongly appreciates | FisherAppreciates | FordAppreciates | FriedmanStrongly appreciates | HoskinsStrongly appreciates | MendozaMinimizes complexityCandidate's materials are one-sided and fail to call out Hamas. | ShowalterAppreciates |
| Will support Israel's defense capabilities | BoykinStrongly support | CollinsNeutralCollins has stated that she would fund Israel's defense, while making statements critical of funding for Israel and viewing U.S. funding of Israel as a cause of Palestinian suffering. She also participated in protests organized by Jewish Voices for Peace, which advocates for an end of funding for Israel's defense. | Conyears-ErvinStrongly support | DriverStrongly support | FisherSupport with caveats | FordStrongly support | FriedmanStrongly support | HoskinsStrongly support | MendozaWill not support | ShowalterWill not supportIn our interview, candidate stated he might support Israel's defense if the Netanyahu government were not in power. Hinging the defense of half of the world's Jewish population on disapproval of a specific Prime Minister who was democratically elected is a position we view as opposing Israel's defense funding. |
| Will oppose BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) | BoykinStrongly oppose | CollinsOppose with caveatsThis ranking recognizes that the candidate did not have a full range of BDS applications in mind. Opposed BDS's call for the elimination of Israel. Supports boycotts as a legitimate form of free speech. Supports the ACLU position on boycotts. | Conyears-ErvinStrongly oppose | DriverStrongly oppose | FisherOppose with caveats | FordOppose with caveatsCandidate voted for anti-BDS provision in current Illinois law and has not publicly supported its repeal, however he expressed interest in all sides on the issue. | FriedmanStrongly oppose | HoskinsStrongly oppose | MendozaNANo mention of BDS in materials reviewed, but candidate's materials endorse the position that the State of Israel should not exist as a Jewish state. | ShowalterOppose |
| Disavows "Globalize the Intifada," "River to Sea," etc.Disavows harmful language such as "Globalize the Intifada" and "From the River to the Sea" and other rhetoric discussed in interview | BoykinDisavows with caveats | CollinsDisavows | Conyears-ErvinStrongly disavows | DriverStrongly disavows | FisherDisavowsDid not fully grasp the implication of some of the rhetoric. | FordStrongly disavows | FriedmanStrongly disavows | HoskinsStrongly disavows | MendozaUses this language themselvesUse of 'free Palestine' slogans on her initial webpage (no longer prominently displayed). | ShowalterUses this language themselvesDespite expressing an understanding of our concerns with the term "free Palestine" given its connotations, candidate has doubled down on using the term in his social media, stating on Instagram, "In case I have not made myself clear yet, free Palestine, abolish ICE and prosecute these monsters." View post |
| Will be a strong leader with an open door to our community | BoykinStrongly support | CollinsNeutralWhile we appreciate Collins' openness and willingness to listen and learn, based on inconsistent statements and positions following October 7, 2023, we do not view Collins as a reliable leader on behalf of our community. | Conyears-ErvinStrongly support | DriverStrongly support | FisherStrongly support | FordStrongly support | FriedmanStrongly support | HoskinsStrongly support | MendozaNo interest or understandingCandidate has failed to respond to multiple efforts at dialogue and understanding. | ShowalterNeutralWhile Showalter appears to be a reliable leader in fighting right-wing antisemitism and expresses interest in learning our perspectives, his stridently antizionist and anti-Israel positions in his social media and campaign materials (including picturing himself with a "Free Palestine" pin), lead us to be concerned that he will not effectively address rising left-wing antisemitism. |
| Issue | Boykin | Collins | Conyears-Ervin | Driver | Fisher | Ford | Friedman | Hoskins | Mendoza | Showalter |
Brief Candidate Summaries
Hover or click on bars to view each issue and answer.
Richard Boykin
This candidate has a long history of public service. He shared deep knowledge and commitment to the Jewish community, a strong commitment to Israel as a Jewish homeland and its right to self-defense, and a clear understanding of the challenge of antisemitism today. He also expressed a strong and deeply felt desire to strengthen Black-Jewish relationships in our district.
Kina Collins
This candidate values relationships with members of the Jewish community, appreciates the history of Jewish involvement in the civil rights movement, and is open to deepening her understanding of our perspective. At the same time, she has made inconsistent statements regarding Israel and its defense, both in public and in our interview. While she has condemned Hamas' terrorist attack, she has also vocally called for ceasefires in the Israel-Gaza conflict without demanding hostage release. Of particular concern is a statement she has made that veers into an antisemitic trope about Israel, suggesting Israel's wrongful taking of money from American taxpayers for their own health care and putting guns onto our streets."If you all are talking about the eggs and the gas and all of this, and you ain't got it, and we ain't got the money, then why are we paying 68% of Israel's military budget and why do they have universal healthcare, and we don't. Right? And why do they not have a mass shooting problem in their country, and we do. So those are very pertinent questions that people who have lost their jobs over these last couple of years who are struggling to pay for their prescription drugs, their food, and their mortgage every month, they are going to have those conversations. And it's a valid question to ask." (Ben Joravsky Show, quoting Kina Collins, August 4, 2025). Our group believes this framing of U.S. aid to Israel, the Jewish state as directly taking resources from Americans' basic well-being is an antisemitic trope and has the potential to be especially dangerous if Jews and supporters of Israel are scapegoated for rising prices and economic instability in the US.
Melissa Conyears-Ervin
Melissa Conyears-Ervin has a warm relationship to the Jewish community. In her time as Chicago Treasurer, she has appeared as a speaker at Chicago synagogues, participated in Menorah lighting ceremonies at city hall and has been outspoken in her support of the hostages taken by Hamas (We Stand With Israel - Tablet Magazine). She is committed to supporting Israel in the face of security threats (Chicago Sun-Times article). She is open to learning more about the security needs of the Jewish community in the district and addressing antisemitic threats in Jewish spaces, though her specific legislative and policy agenda focused less on concrete steps she would take as a congressmember than on her role as public speaker. Especially noteworthy, however, is her opposition to BDS and her unwillingness to compromise her commitments to Israel's defense to appease anti-Israel voices within the Democratic party.
Update posted 2/16/26: On Feb. 10, 2026, we learned that Melissa Conyears-Ervin has been endorsed by the United Democracy Project, which is a super PAC directly affiliated with AIPAC. This endorsement does not change our assessment of Ms. Conyears-Ervin on the issues we evaluated. See AIPAC information in our Toolkit.
Anthony Driver
This candidate impressed our group with his understanding of left-wing antisemitism, harmful divisive rhetoric, and the threat posed by extremism, which he reported calling out in his own progressive union circles. Given his expressed commitment to inclusion of the Jewish community, his solid understanding of the issues involving Zionism, BDS, Israel/Palestine, we believe he has the potential to be a dynamic and inclusive voice and ally with our community and a unifier within the Democratic party.
Thomas Fisher
This candidate expressed a strong interest in including all voices from our diverse community and creating conditions that will address hate in all forms. He provided somewhat equivocal answers, however, to questions about left-wing-antisemitism, Zionism, and Israel, including support for Israel's right to defend itself. His idealism about "getting along" at times appeared to lump Jewish concerns with those of other groups (Asians, Latinos, Blacks and Palestinians) without addressing the specific ways in which antisemitism operates differently from other forms of discrimination and hate.For example, following the shootings at Bondi and at Brown University, Dr. Fisher made the following statement: "The shootings in Bondi and at Brown University show how easily violence crosses borders and boundaries into classrooms, public spaces and moments that should be safe..." Note: that targeting the Jewish community was not mentioned anywhere in his statement. Our group believes that clear antisemitic attacks, such as Bondi Beach, need to be named as such and not overgeneralized as a problem of violence. Despite some equivocation, Dr. Fisher exhibited an openness to understanding the specific challenges our community is facing and to listening to and learning more about our concerns.
La Shawn Ford
As the candidate with the most high-profile endorsements in the Congressional District 7 race and a long track record as a legislator, we were able to review this candidate's record of accomplishment which demonstrates a solid commitment to inclusion and working with broad coalitions that advance many values we in the Jewish community and our allies share. Mr. Ford articulated a deep appreciation of the shared history of persecution of Black and Jewish people. We found Mr. Ford very open and eager to listen and to work with our community. At the same time, we had some concern that Mr. Ford lacks awareness of how left-wing antisemitism operates and may lack a nuanced understanding of issues related to BDS, Zionism and Israel's security. This has led to his signing onto resolutions and policy position prematurely.Consistent with his representations to us in our interview, our background research did not find a public record of legislative or policy positions contrary to our members' concerns, with one notable exception: Mr. Ford very quickly had signed onto a resolution (on October 8) with other state legislators for an immediate cease fire following the Hamas attack of October 7, 2023 which did not include a condemnation of Hamas's terror attack. He did correct this with a later statement of strong support for the hostages and condemning the terror attack. We are encouraged, however, by his humility about areas he is not fully versed on and his willingness to work in good faith with constituents dedicated to the public good.
Jason Friedman
As the sole Jewish candidate in the race and an established leader in the Chicago-area Jewish community, this candidate had an unusual depth of knowledge and experience that he is ready to bring to bear on behalf of the Jewish community both locally and nationally, as an articulate spokesperson for our community in Congress. His commitment to peace and security of Israel while recognizing the legitimate interests of the Palestinians makes him a potential legislative leader in the vital area of concern to our community.
Rory Hoskins
This candidate is a true advocate for the Jewish community, not only through word, but by action. He not only cares deeply about antisemitism but has instituted policy as Mayor that directly addressed this and rejected that which fostered it. He is acutely aware of the impact of ignoring and not educating people about antisemitism. He understands the historical roots of growing antisemitism and the intersection of this in its current form with antizionism. His depth of knowledge and critical thinking will make him a strong leader for addressing issues of concern for this community and others.
Anabel Mendoza
Mendoza is the only candidate of the 10 candidates we reached out to who did not respond to our multiple requests (which included multiple contacts on her campaign web site and several communications by email with an identified surrogate who was active in her campaign). Ms. Mendoza's platforms include strong antizionist and anti-Israel positions and language that can be read as calling for the elimination of the Jewish state.Ms. Mendoza's campaign web page includes the following statement: "Amidst the ongoing genocide in Palestine, I will continue to demand an immediate end to the occupation and colonization of Arab lands, fight for full Palestinian human and civil rights, and the right of all Palestinians forcibly displaced to be able to return to their homes." By singling out Israel for special condemnation (and not mentioning such countries as Russia, China, Iran, or North Korea), Ms. Mendoza is applying double standards and delegitimization to Israel, the world's sole Jewish state. By calling for the return of "all" Palestinians (including Hamas members!) to their homes (in Israel, including within the 1948 borders), Ms. Mendoza also implicitly endorses the elimination of the Jewish State. Nothing in her publicly available statements suggests appreciation for concerns as to the safety and security of Israel and Israelis (even though Israel itself is a nation of immigrants and refugees), or concern about the dramatic increase in antisemitic violence against Jews in America and worldwide that has occurred in the wake of October 7 and Hamas's terror attack.
Reed Showalter
During our interview this candidate expressed support for the Jewish community in addressing right wing antisemitism and strengthening hate crime laws and welcomed building relationships with our community. But he said he was unaware (though open to learning more) about antisemitism/antizionism/anti-Israelism and the exclusion of Jewish voices on the Left. His campaign materials contain one-sided pronouncements against "genocide and war crimes" in Gaza, demand the "arrest of Benjamin Netanyahu" while failing to call out Hamas. His position that no funding for Israel's defense should be authorized leads us to be concerned that he would not be protective of Israel's and Israelis' legitimate needs for safety and security. (See Reed Showalter's Issues page for more details on his position statements.) Since meeting with us, his positions seem more antithetical to the broader Jewish community.
Update posted 2/16/26: Reed Showalter has continued to highlight his anti-AIPAC stance and singles out AIPAC in his campaign materials. His inappropriate use of a synagogue appearance to make an attack ad against his opponents for their support of the two-state solution has been noted by Michael Zmora and Phyllis Rubin in the Wednesday Journal on Feb. 11, pointing also to the candidate’s contradictory positions on this same issue in his answers endorsing the two state solution in the Jewish Federation questionnaire.
Methodology
Evaluation Basis
Our evaluations are based on comprehensive candidate interviews combined with independent research. We use the following methodology to ensure fairness, transparency, and accuracy:
Step 1: Candidate Interviews
We conducted in-depth interviews with each candidate, asking detailed questions about their positions on issues critical to the Jewish community. These interviews were conducted between December 16th through January 14th, by 4 varying members of our organization who were trained to listen carefully and ask follow-up questions to clarify positions.
Step 2: Individual Evaluations
Individuals who conducted the interviews complete their own evaluations independently. Each interviewer assessed how the candidate responded to each issue using the evaluation scale described below.
Step 3: Collation and Analysis
We collate the individual evaluations from all interviewers to identify areas of consensus and any divergence in assessments. When ratings differ, we investigated further to understand why.
Step 4: Independent Research
We conducted separate research on each candidate to verify claims made during their interviews. We look for:
- Voting records and public statements that confirm or contradict interview responses
- Community actions and engagement with Jewish community organizations
- Consistency of positions over time
- Any evidence of antisemitic statements or associations
Step 5: Documentation and Context
When we find contradictory evidence or when context is needed to understand a rating, we document these findings clearly. This information is available in our detailed summaries and footnotes.
Selecting Candidates to be Included in the Evaluation Process
Eight of the candidates were selected to be interviewed using information presented in an article in the Wednesday Journal (October 10th 2025). The article focused on the status of each candidacy based on funds raised. It omitted Anabel Mendoza and Reed Showalter in the picture of the top candidates but mentioned them in the body of the article. Both of these candidates were included in our sample. The article noted that none of the remaining candidates had raised $10,000 while all the candidates we interviewed had raised at least that amount except for Kina Collins, who was nevertheless listed as a leading candidate at the time due to her prior races. Based on this criteria we did not include: Felix Tello, Jazmin Robinson and David Ehrlich. Of the 10 candidates we reached out to, only Anabel Mendoza did not respond to our multiple efforts to reach her and her campaign. Thus her evaluations are based entirely on her public record to date.
Evaluation Scale
We use consistent language to describe levels of support or concern across all issues. However, because different issues may require different evaluation frameworks, we provide specific context for each issue. As noted above the qualitative analysis is limited in the nuance it can capture, thus we included both carefully written narratives, based on the interview and outside sources and detailed footnotes where appropriate.
Handling Disagreement
When evaluators disagreed significantly about a rating, we explain how we arrived at the final assessment. This might involve:
- Noting that consensus was not reached
- Explaining what different evaluators heard in the candidate's response
- Providing context from interview notes or external research
- Averaging ratings only when appropriate for the type of issue
Our Commitment to Accuracy and Fairness
Transparency: All candidates are evaluated using the same questions and methodology. Candidates are informed of our evaluation process and have the opportunity to provide feedback or additional context if they wish.
Completeness: We document not just our conclusions but the evidence supporting them, including quotes from interviews and external sources.
Fairness: We work to understand candidates' full positions on our issues and don't distort their words. We look at consistency of positions and acknowledge when candidates have shown evolution on issues, or shifted their positions.
Accuracy: We verify claims through research and will correct any errors we discover. We cite sources for our research findings.
These evaluations are provided to help our community make informed decisions. We encourage community members to review the full documentation of our process and to reach their own conclusions about which candidates best represent their values and interests.
For more detailed information about any candidate, including direct quotes and research findings, please contact us or see the notes in the evaluations and summaries, or in the Concerns and Toolkit sections of the website.