Rising Diesel Costs Complicate Trump’s Midterm Strategy

Key Moments

Political Stakes Rise as Diesel Prices Climb

With the November midterm elections approaching, President Donald Trump is deploying a series of expensive and politically sensitive measures to tackle one persistent economic concern: high diesel prices.

His administration has committed billions of dollars in fresh assistance to farmers, loosened regulations for truck drivers, softened sanctions on Russian fuel, and urged European partners to draw down emergency fuel reserves. Despite these steps, diesel prices moved higher again last week, leaving Trump expending political and fiscal resources without securing the price relief Republicans had hoped to showcase before voters head to the polls.

Republicans are attempting to hold on to slim majorities in Congress at a time when elevated costs are a key issue for the electorate. Nearly 80% of Americans blame Trump for higher costs, according to an October Reuters/Ipsos survey.

Diesel Market Pressures and Regional Fallout

According to the Energy Information Administration, U.S. diesel prices increased by nearly 10 cents per gallon in the most recent week to an average of $6.28, erasing two consecutive weeks of declines and keeping prices near record levels.

The political impact is especially intense in historically Republican Farm Belt states such as Iowa and Kansas. There, rising fuel and fertilizer prices, trade tensions, and weak farm economics have eroded confidence among some of Trump’s traditional supporters.

Trump has highlighted his diesel-related initiatives at rallies throughout the region. At a Nebraska event, he signed an executive order onstage authorizing the use of red-dyed diesel in highway vehicles. At a Kansas rally on Monday, he announced $8 billion in additional aid for farmers.

These moves underscore the trade-offs the administration is accepting in pursuit of near-term relief. The new agricultural support further strains federal finances, while easing restrictions on Russian fuel risks helping Moscow generate revenue for its war in Ukraine. Meanwhile, U.S. pressure on European allies to tap strategic reserves – and the accompanying threat of curbing U.S. diesel exports – has stirred diplomatic tensions.

“The president tends to discount long-term losses over short-term gain, and I am skeptical if there is any short gain to be had here,” said Chris Borick, a pollster and political scientist at Muhlenberg College in Pennsylvania.

White House Defense of Policy Mix

The White House has attributed elevated diesel prices to “pre-existing issues,” citing years of refinery shutdowns and fallout from Russia’s war in Ukraine, while arguing that Trump’s actions are aimed at easing pressures on consumers.

“The President wants diesel prices to fall, which is why he has taken historic actions to save American farmers, truckers, and workers every hard-earned penny,” White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said.

Unclear Impact of Red-Dyed Diesel Move

One of the administration’s most direct interventions in the diesel market has struggled to gain traction. Earlier this month, Trump signed an executive order allowing truck drivers to use red-dyed diesel – normally reserved for off-road uses such as agricultural machinery – for highway operations, temporarily relaxing certain federal tax reporting and record-keeping requirements.

However, the Internal Revenue Service has not eliminated the federal diesel tax itself. Instead, it has temporarily suspended related reporting requirements and penalties through year-end, leaving truck stops and fuel sellers uncertain about compliance and risk exposure.

David Fialkov, the chief lobbyist at NATSO, which represents major U.S. truck stop operators, said members welcome the focus on diesel costs but remain concerned about the lack of clarity.

He described the guidance as “murky” and argued that the policy carries excessive risk for operators. “I really don’t see any of these dyed diesel announcements making a meaningful dent in diesel prices,” Fialkov said.

Record Farm Payments Offer Cushion, Not Cure

The administration is also leaning heavily on federal payments to soften the blow for affected constituencies, particularly farmers. Government support to farmers was already projected to exceed $47 billion this year, bolstered by commodity support and $12 billion in tariff-related assistance distributed earlier in the year by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

The additional $8 billion relief package unveiled by Trump would push total farm payments to a record $55.4 billion, surpassing the previous high of $45 billion in 2020, when farmers received pandemic-related aid.

These payments can help farmers cope with cost inflation and reduced sales, but they do not directly resolve the underlying market disruptions that are lifting fuel and fertilizer prices. They also invite scrutiny over taxpayer-funded compensation for harms that farm organizations partially attribute to the administration’s own trade and foreign policy decisions.

“This is the second round of emergency aid this year to address losses that were largely foreseeable,” National Farmers Union President Rob Larew said. “Trade disruptions and rising fuel costs tied to conflict abroad have put family farmers in a difficult position, and one-time payments can’t provide the stability they need to plan for the future.”

Key aspects of the newly announced program remain uncertain. USDA could not immediately clarify how the $8 billion would be allocated, the timing of disbursements to farmers, or whether congressional authorization is necessary.

Sanctions Easing on Russian Diesel Sparks Backlash

Some of the administration’s attempts to expand diesel supply involve significant geopolitical compromises. The decision to relax sanctions on Russian diesel – originally intended to constrain Moscow’s energy income and its capacity to finance the war in Ukraine – has attracted criticism from both parties and prompted questions about whether the move will have a meaningful impact on U.S. fuel prices.

Trump has argued that this sanctions relief is essential to drawing Russian President Vladimir Putin into talks aimed at ending the conflict in Ukraine and securing the release of American prisoner Stephen Hubbard.

Shifting Blame as Price Relief Proves Elusive

As these interventions have failed to bring diesel costs down, Trump has increasingly attempted to redirect political blame toward Ukraine and President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, rather than the Iran war, in the run-up to the November 3 elections.

Analysts cited in the article, however, contend that the Iran conflict has been the dominant factor in the diesel price surge by disrupting global oil trade and refined product flows. They said Ukrainian strikes on Russian refineries have contributed to tighter supply but have played a smaller role in shaping prices.

“I sort of see it as a blame-shifting kind of scapegoating operation, more than a genuine attempt to moderate prices in the lead-up to the election,” said Edward Fishman, director of the Maurice R. Greenberg Center at the Council on Foreign Relations.