Washington (CNN) -- It was a long summer for President Barack Obama, who for months has defended his decision not to send U.S. troops to fight ISIS on the ground in the Middle East. 

But lawmakers contend that in the wake of a rapidly-spreading Ebola crisis and the upcoming midterm elections, the President's commitment towards fighting the extremist terrorist organization has fallen short. 

Comparing the spread of Ebola to the ISIS threat against the United States, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, said Sunday that he doesn't believe that the President is handling each issue with equal rigor. 

"The stronger Ebola gets in Africa, the more it spreads and the more entrenched it is -- the more endangered we are," Graham told Candy Crowley on CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday. "The same (goes) for radical Islam in the Mideast. It seems to be that the President is all in when it comes to Ebola. I want to compliment him for sending troops to help get ahead of this in Africa, but we have a series of half-measures with (ISIS)." 

His Republican colleague, Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, went a step further Sunday, saying that the President's foreign policy "is being trapped by his campaign rhetoric." 

Ebola becomes an election issue 

"I'm very fearful as we look at the current military strategy that it is surrounding the November elections and that he won't have the resolve to follow through with what needs to be done in a sustained effort to destroy ISIS, and we're about to repeat the same thing with Afghanistan," Ayotte said on Fox News Sunday. 
Are there elections coming up?
 November elections