LET'S TALK ABOUT DIESEL PRICES

Yes, Let’s Talk About High Diesel Prices

An Op-Ed on Oil

By Jonah

Diesel prices are painfully high, and the consequences reach far beyond the fuel pump. Farmers need diesel to run tractors, combines and trucks. Truckers move nearly everything Americans buy. Construction, mining, manufacturing and emergency services all depend upon it. When diesel rises, the cost eventually works its way into groceries, building materials and almost every product transported across the country.

Democrats have naturally decided to blame President Trump. That is rich. They should begin by holding themselves accountable.

Trump did not create the refinery shortages or decades of policies that left America without an adequate margin of safety. He is the president bringing solutions to the problems he inherited.

The present price spike was triggered by war and disruptions to the international energy system. But America’s vulnerability was created over decades. The political left’s obsession with eliminating fossil fuels discouraged new refineries, complicated expansion of existing facilities and warned investors that petroleum infrastructure might not be allowed to operate long enough to recover its cost. Now some of the same people who created that hostile investment climate want to blame the president trying to reverse it.

Not Trump’s War

“A war which would have never happened if I were president. Would have never happened.”

—President Donald Trump, 2026 State of the Union

Decades of regulatory and energy policy had already stacked the kindling. The wars lit the match. Particularly the recent Ukrainian drone attacks of Russian energy facilities near Moscow.

The continuing war in Ukraine is a setback for world peace, energy security and diesel supplies. But blaming Donald Trump for its origin turns history upside down.

Russia seized Crimea and began its intervention in eastern Ukraine in 2014, while Barack Obama was president invasion during Trump’s first term. Vladimir Putin launched that invasion on February 24, 2022, while Joe Biden was president.

Trump has repeatedly said that the invasion would never have occurred had he remained in office. No one can conclusively prove an alternative history, but Trump makes a serious argument. His first administration armed Ukraine with lethal weapons, imposed sanctions on Russia and opposed the Nord Stream 2 pipeline because it would enrich Russia, bypass Ukraine and deepen Europe’s dependence on Russian energy.

Since returning to office, Trump has been among the world’s most active leaders seeking an end to the war. He has spoken with both Putin and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, dispatched senior negotiators, pursued ceasefires and attempted to stop attacks on energy infrastructure. He has also signed additional sanctions targeting Russia’s energy sector, defense industry and shadow tanker fleet.

His attempts to stop Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries should be understood within that larger effort. Those attacks may serve Ukraine’s military strategy, but they also remove diesel from the world market and increase costs for American farmers and truckers. Seeking an energy ceasefire is not the same as siding with Russia. It is an effort to de-escalate the war, protect global energy supplies and create an opening for peace.

Putin is responsible for invading Ukraine. Trump is working to end the war he inherited.

Policy Baked In the Vulnerability

Diesel prices reflect several costs: crude oil, refining, distribution, retail margins and taxes. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, crude oil accounted for approximately 51 percent of the average retail price of diesel between 2004 and 2025. But today’s crisis is not merely about the availability of crude. It is also about the world’s limited ability to refine crude into diesel.

“War-related damage has simply taken too many refineries offline.”

—Reuters energy analysis 

Russia has historically been a major exporter of diesel and gasoil. Ukrainian drone attacks have damaged or interrupted production at important Russian refineries. Russia then restricted petroleum-product exports to protect its own domestic supply. That removed diesel from an international market that was already dangerously tight.

Iran Took the World Hostage

On October 7, 2023, Iran-backed Hamas took 251 human beings hostage. On February 28, 2026, Iran’s leaders attempted to take the world hostage.

This time, their weapon was the Strait of Hormuz. By effectively closing a narrow passage through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil trade normally flows, Tehran turned the global energy supply into an instrument of coercion. Tankers stopped moving, fuel supplies tightened and prices surged across the world.

The parallel is chilling. Hamas used innocent men, women and children as bargaining chips. Iran used the world’s dependence on oil and gas. In each case, the strategy was essentially the same: seize something indispensable and then demand concessions for its release.

That is the larger threat Trump is confronting. High diesel prices are painful, but surrendering to energy blackmail would reward the tactic and ensure that it is used again.

Iran's leaders want the world to suffer, so they are disrupting the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz and holding the world hostage

Underinvestment: The Predictable Result

For years, climate activists and Democratic policymakers opposed pipelines and refineries, imposed increasingly complex fuel requirements, promoted mandates intended to phase out internal-combustion vehicles and created tremendous uncertainty about the future of petroleum. A large refinery costs billions of dollars and must operate for decades to justify that investment. Why would a company accept that risk when political leaders repeatedly announce their intention to eliminate its market?

Environmental regulations produced genuine reductions in pollution, but those benefits were not free. Ultra-low-sulfur diesel requires additional processing, energy, equipment and distribution controls. The EIA specifically acknowledges that America’s transition to cleaner, lower-sulfur diesel increased diesel production and distribution costs. Different regional requirements also make it harder to move replacement fuel quickly when a refinery shuts down.

Meanwhile, major new refineries were not being built. Existing facilities added capacity through modernization and expansion, but older refineries closed and the remaining system became increasingly concentrated. The plants still operating now run close to their practical limits. That may appear efficient during calm periods, but it leaves very little margin for war, accidents, maintenance or unexpected demand.

Trump Isn’t the Cause, But He Is Bringing Solutions

“Expanding that capacity is a top priority for the President and his energy team.”

—White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers

Trump Is Acting on the Immediate Crisis

Trump has also acted to protect shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, while other countries refused to.  The United States has committed naval resources to clearing mines, monitoring international shipping lanes and protecting commercial vessels willing to make the passage. Trump announced that mines had been removed from international waters and warned Iran against replacing them.

“The main objective…was to find the right deal in order to open the Strait of Hormuz.”

—French President Emmanuel Macron

 

Iran Knows the American Political Calendar

Iran’s leaders know exactly when America holds its midterm elections. They also understand that prolonged disruption in the Strait of Hormuz means higher fuel prices, angrier voters and mounting political pressure on President Trump.

There is no need to imagine secret coordination between Tehran and the Democratic Party. Their interests simply converge. Iran wants Americans to lose patience with Trump before his pressure campaign forces Tehran to retreat. Democrats want to turn every painful trip to the fuel pump into an argument against Trump and congressional Republicans.

Iran is using control of the Strait as bargaining leverage while Trump faces increasing domestic pressure ahead of the midterms. Democrats, meanwhile, are making rising fuel costs and the Iran conflict central elements of their campaign against the administration.

Iran’s leaders are counting on America’s political divisions to weaken the country’s resolve. Every Democrat who blames Trump for the consequences at the fuel pump—while glossing over Tehran’s deliberate disruption of global energy supplies—helps Iran’s strategy succeed.

Trump knows that high fuel prices could hurt Republicans in November. Nevertheless, he has said that the midterms are not influencing his Iran policy, while his administration continues to identify preventing a nuclear-armed Iran as its overriding objective.

In my view, Trump deserves credit for putting the danger of a nuclear-armed Iran ahead of the potential political cost in the midterm elections. He is refusing to allow the electoral calendar to determine America’s response to a far greater and more enduring threat.

Tehran understands the calendar. So does Trump. The difference is that Iran hopes to exploit it, while Trump appears willing to risk the election rather than surrender to it.

Iran refuses to make a deal in which they must abandon their nuclear weapon ambitions. The diesel cricis is evidence of Iran's determination.

The First Chess Move: Removing Venezuela’s Criminal Leader

Trump anticipated the obvious. A strong case can be made for that. Maduro’s removal preceded the worst of the diesel crisis and gave the United States access to the heavy crude its Gulf Coast refineries are designed to process.

Trump’s first major move on the energy chessboard may have come before most Americans realized how serious the diesel problem would become: removing Nicolás Maduro from power in Venezuela.

Maduro was not simply another unfriendly foreign leader. He presided over an authoritarian narco-state that drove millions of Venezuelans from their country, allowed one of the world’s richest petroleum industries to decay and opened the door to growing Russian, Chinese and Iranian influence in America’s own hemisphere.

When American forces captured Maduro, Trump did more than remove an indicted leader accused of participating in an international cocaine-trafficking conspiracy. He changed the strategic alignment of the country possessing the world’s largest proven oil reserves.

The effect on energy policy was immediate. The United States reached an agreement to redirect between 30 million and 50 million barrels of Venezuelan oil toward the American market rather than China. Washington encouraged American and international companies to invest in restoring Venezuela’s badly damaged petroleum industry. By mid-2026, Venezuelan oil and fuel exports had risen from an average of approximately 847,000 barrels per day in 2025 to more than 1.2 million barrels per day.

That oil is especially important because much of it is heavy crude—the type many sophisticated Gulf Coast refineries were constructed to process. Increasing that supply helps those facilities operate efficiently, supports American diesel production and reduces competition for other limited sources of heavy crude.

“The rules of the global energy game have changed.”

—Reuters analysis following Maduro’s removal»

It would be an overstatement to claim that Maduro was removed solely because of oil or that Venezuelan crude could prevent every future price increase. Restoring a neglected petroleum industry takes enormous investment and time. 

Nevertheless, the strategic consequences are difficult to ignore. Trump removed a hostile and criminally accused ruler, weakened the foothold of America’s adversaries, redirected oil from China toward the United States and began rebuilding a nearby source of crude particularly valuable to American refineries.

When the wars in Iran and Ukraine later disrupted international energy supplies, that earlier move looked increasingly consequential. Venezuela could not eliminate the diesel shortage, but its additional oil helped prevent an already serious American problem from becoming even worse.

Home Front Fix

Venezuelan crude cannot replace lost global refining capacity. It can, however, keep American refineries supplied with the feedstock they were designed to process. That supports domestic diesel output and helps prevent American prices from rising even further.

Trump is also pushing to expand refining capacity at home. His administration has pursued faster permitting, regulatory reform and investment in refinery modernization. It has considered using the Defense Production Act to support petroleum refining and logistics, met directly with refinery executives and announced a proposed 168,000-barrel-per-day refinery in Brownsville, Texas.

None of this can reverse decades of underinvestment overnight. A refinery cannot be ordered today and begin producing diesel next month. The time required to add capacity is precisely why the country should not have spent years discouraging it.

Farmers Need Help Now

Farmers cannot wait years for new refining capacity. Harvest must proceed, regardless of the price of diesel.

Trump has directed his administration to examine targeted relief. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins has said that the president personally called her to discuss diesel costs for farmers and that additional action was being prepared. Republican lawmakers have proposed temporary assistance and measures to keep more diesel inside the United States during the harvest.

The administration has already provided broader assistance through the Farmer Bridge Assistance program, which offers billions of dollars to row-crop producers confronting disrupted markets and rising production costs. It has also reduced expenses associated with diesel equipment by protecting farmers’ right to repair and changing troublesome Diesel Exhaust Fluid rules that caused costly shutdowns, repairs and engine derating.

Those measures do not make six-dollar diesel painless. They demonstrate, however, that Trump recognizes both sides of the problem: America must increase supply over the long term while helping farmers survive the immediate emergency.

Democrats Blaming Trump Is Rich—They Should Hold Themselves Accountable

Accountability Requires Looking Backward—and Forward

Presidents deserve to be judged by their policies. Trump should be judged by whether his efforts ultimately increase refinery capacity, strengthen energy security and lower prices. But it is intellectually dishonest to pretend that the diesel system he inherited was created in January 2025—or that wars and refinery shortages developed because he suddenly returned to office.

Democrats spent years telling the petroleum industry that its days were numbered. They celebrated blocked pipelines, opposed refinery development, imposed costly mandates and treated investment in fossil-fuel infrastructure as morally suspect. They cannot credibly express surprise when companies decline to invest billions in that infrastructure.

President Trump is championing a fundamental change in American energy policy—one designed to increase refinery capacity, strengthen domestic diesel production and reduce prices over time. He is pursuing more crude supply, more refining, less regulatory obstruction and greater security for the international routes upon which the energy market depends.

The current crisis will not disappear immediately. The war in Ukraine continues. Iran continues to threaten international shipping. Refineries take time to expand, and global diesel inventories remain dangerously low.

A Question of Priorities

Trump’s priorities are an important part of this story. A president focused exclusively on the midterm elections might retreat from Iran, lift the pressure and accept whatever short-term reduction in fuel prices followed. Trump has chosen a different course.

His stated first priority is preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. That means confronting a radical regime openly hostile to Israel, protecting international shipping and refusing to exchange long-term security for temporary political relief. His second priority is ending the wars and restoring stable energy markets. Lower diesel prices remain important, particularly for farmers and truckers, but Trump argues that they cannot come at the cost of allowing Iran to become a nuclear power.
That choice carries real political risk. High fuel prices are hurting American families, weakening Trump’s approval ratings and threatening Republicans in the midterm elections. Yet he continues pursuing the larger objective. In my view, that tells us something important about his priorities: he is placing the security of America and Israel—and the danger of a nuclear-armed Iran—ahead of his own immediate political advantage.

Critics may challenge his strategy or question whether military pressure will achieve its objective. That is a legitimate debate. But it is unfair to portray Trump as indifferent to diesel prices without acknowledging the more dangerous threat he believes he is confronting. He is not ignoring the economic pain. He is making a difficult judgment about which danger must come first.

Look in the Mirror Liberals

Democrats blaming him for today’s diesel prices is rich. Before pointing fingers, they should examine the consequences of their own energy agenda—and finally accept some responsibility for the shortage they helped bake into the system.

Liberals who exploit Iran-driven fuel prices to weaken Trump—while saying little about Tehran’s use of the Strait of Hormuz as leverage—are, whether they acknowledge it or not, playing on Iran’s side of the chessboard.

Sources

U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Factors Affecting Diesel Prices”:

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/diesel-fuel/factors-affecting-diesel-prices.php

U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Diesel Prices and Outlook”:

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/diesel-fuel/prices-and-outlook.php

U.S. Energy Information Administration, “When Was the Last Refinery Built in the United States?”:

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=29&t=6

U.S. Energy Information Administration, “U.S. Refining Capacity Decreased During 2025”:

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=67807

Reuters, “Half of Russia’s Top Diesel-Producing Refineries Cut Back Output After Drone Strikes,” September 15, 2026:

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/half-russias-top-diesel-producing-refineries-cut-back-output-after-drone-strikes-2026-09-15/

Reuters, “How the U.S. Could Clear Mines From the Strait of Hormuz,” April 16, 2026:

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/how-us-could-clear-mines-strait-hormuz-2026-04-16/

Reuters, “Trump Says Strait of Hormuz Has Been Demined,” August 25, 2026:

https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-says-strait-hormuz-has-been-demined-warns-iran-not-plant-more-2026-08-25/

Reuters, “Refiners Elbow Traders to Take a Larger Slice of Venezuela’s Oil,” July 21, 2026:

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/refiners-elbow-traders-take-larger-slice-venezuelas-oil-2026-07-21/

Reuters, “White House Weighs How to Use Defense Production Act to Expand U.S. Oil Refining Capacity,” September 11, 2026:

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/white-house-weighs-how-use-defense-production-act-expand-us-oil-refining-2026-09-11/

USDA Farm Service Agency, “USDA Announces Enrollment Period for Farmer Bridge Payments,” February 20, 2026:

https://www.fsa.usda.gov/news-events/news/02-20-2026/usda-announces-enrollment-period-farmer-bridge-payments

EQUALITY FOR ALL?

The Irony: Capitalism Spreads the Prosperity Communism Promises

Communism promises a classless society in which wealth and productive resources are held in common. 

Communism promises to share wealth. Capitalism promises people the freedom to earn it. The irony is that capitalism has done a better job of spreading prosperity.

Look at the United States and China. Both are economic giants. Yet the latest income figures suggest that an American household receives roughly six times what a Chinese household does. 

The measures differ, but the gap is too large to dismiss. When China’s workers help produce so much of the world’s goods, how much of that wealth reaches them?

The workers provide the low wage advantage; those with power reap the richest rewards.

The same question reaches beyond wages. What are the conditions in which people work? Can they speak freely and defend their rights? What happens to the air, water, and land we all share when production is prized above accountability?

"China cannot count on ever higher exports to drive durable growth." So says a recent IMF February 2026 article, “How China’s Economy Can Pivot to Consumption-led Growth.”⁠ The IMF report describes China’s economy supported by strong exports while domestic demand remains weak. It then argues for stronger social protection and more income for lower-income households. 

Capitalism has its failures, and wealth can concentrate here too. But its record poses an uncomfortable question for those who promise equality through state control: If equality is the goal, why does the system built on that promise leave so much power at the top?

The irony is that Communism promises "Equality for all." Yet, Capitalism delivers greater prosperity.

As Orwell put it, “Some animals are more equal than others.”

THE NUMBERS TELL A STORY THAT DEMOCRATS WON'T

The Trump Numbers You Won’t Hear Before the Midterms

Economic Strength, Military Strength, Geopolitics, and Social Well-Being

With the midterm elections weeks away, Democrats want you to believe the sky is falling. The mainstream, Trump-hating media gives that story plenty of airtime. But there is another side voters deserve to see: record household income, the lowest recorded official poverty rate, a historic drop in violent crime, record energy production, and a resurgence in military recruiting. These figures come from government releases. Taken together, they tell a story that deserves a place in the national conversation before Election Day.

Economic strength:

1. A smaller federal workforce. Federal employment stood at 2.674 million in August 2026, roughly 336,000 below its January 2025 level. Private-sector hiring continued even as the federal payroll shrank.
2. Record household income. Real median household income reached $87,460 in 2025, the highest in the Census Bureau's historical series.
3. Manufacturing jobs are growing. Manufacturing payrolls rose by 58,000 from December 2025 through August 2026. Companies have also announced substantial plans to bring production to the United States.
4. Record energy production. Total U.S. energy production set a record in 2025, including a record 13.6 million barrels of crude oil per day. A proposed new refinery in Brownsville, Texas, remains in development.
5. A surge in energy exports. U.S. liquefied natural gas exports rose 23% in the first half of 2026 compared with the same period in 2025.
6. A renewed commitment to nuclear power. The administration has set a long-term goal of expanding American nuclear generating capacity. Building that capacity will take time.
7. Major foreign investment. Foreign investors spent $232.2 billion acquiring, establishing, or expanding U.S. businesses in 2025, up 49.5% from 2024. The administration has also announced larger future investment commitments; those pledges should be judged as they become actual projects.
8. A reversal in prescription drug prices. The prescription drug component of the consumer price index fell 2.9% over the year ending in August 2026.
9. Labor productivity is rising. Output per hour in nonfarm businesses rose at a 1.4% annual rate in the second quarter of 2026; manufacturing productivity rose at a 2.4% annual rate. Artificial intelligence may bring larger gains as businesses learn to use it, but those future gains are not yet measured results.

Military strength and national security:

1. A recruiting resurgence. The Pentagon reported its strongest recruiting numbers in 15 years for fiscal 2025. The Army met its fiscal 2026 enlistment contract goal four months early, signing more than 61,500 future soldiers. Americans are stepping forward to serve and protect the country.
2. A new generation of military capability. New aircraft and ships are in development, alongside plans for the Golden Dome missile defense system. These programs represent investment in future strength, with different delivery timelines.
3. Historically low southwest border apprehensions. Border Patrol recorded 8,870 southwest border apprehensions in August 2026. The measure counts people apprehended, rather than every attempted crossing.

Good news beyond our borders

1. A record NATO commitment. Allies agreed to work toward spending 5% of GDP on defense and related security by 2035. European allies and Canada also increased core defense spending in 2025. Trump's pressure helped bring that commitment into focus.
2. A stronger security partnership across the Americas. Representatives of 17 countries joined the Americas Counter Cartel Coalition pledge. New regional trade frameworks offer opportunities to strengthen economic ties alongside cooperation against cartels and cross-border crime.
3. Pushing back on Communist China's influence in our hemisphere. Ports, critical minerals, infrastructure, and communications networks all have strategic value. The administration is working to make the United States a stronger trade and security partner for its neighbors, reducing the appeal of dependence on China.
4. Greater attention to Arctic defense. Greenland's Pituffik Space Base already plays a missile warning role. Growing Arctic shipping adds urgency to cooperation on northern security and trade routes.
5. An extraordinary pace of international engagement. President Trump has made extensive trips and held numerous meetings with foreign leaders in pursuit of trade and security agreements.
6. A shift in the Middle East's balance of power. Israel has demonstrated military, intelligence, and defense technology capabilities far beyond its size. Israeli defense exports reached a record $19.2 billion in 2025, nearly 30% above the previous year. Israel is emerging as a regional superpower, supported by a strong U.S.–Israel security partnership under President Trump.

Social well-being and public safety:

1. The lowest recorded official poverty rate. The Census Bureau reported a 2025 official poverty rate of 10.2%.
2. A historic drop in violent crime. The FBI reported that the violent crime rate fell 9.3% in 2025, its largest annual decline since national estimates began in 1936.
3. A murder rate tied for the lowest on record. The 2025 rate of 4.1 murders per 100,000 people matched the lows recorded in 1955 and 1956.
4. Overdose deaths continue to fall. CDC estimated 67,798 deaths in the 12 months ending March 2026, down 12.3% from the preceding 12 months. The decline began before Trump's current term and has continued during it.
5. High-profile fugitive captures. FBI Director Kash Patel reported ten captures from the FBI's Ten Most Wanted list during his tenure.
6. Visible restoration of the nation's capital. Previously inoperable Washington fountains have returned to service, including the Meridian Hill fountain.

What comes next

These numbers tell a story, but they may be only the beginning. Factories take time to build. Investment commitments take time to become jobs. New energy capacity and trade relationships take time to deliver their full value. So does artificial intelligence: its greatest economic impact may come as businesses learn to help workers produce more. We are still in the early stages of what could become a meaningful economic expansion. 2026 numbers are most impressive. President Trump calls it “America's Golden Age.” Whether it earns that name will depend on what happens next, but the results already coming into view deserve to be seen.

Postscript: Seeing With the Good Eye

After posting this article, I watched President Trump address the United Nations General Assembly. As I listened, I realized that he touched on virtually every major point I had just written about—America’s economy, energy production, manufacturing, border security, military strength, international alliances, trade, crime, and the broader renewal taking place across the country. The speech became an unexpected confirmation of the story told by these numbers.

Then I read the mainstream coverage and wondered whether the commentators had watched the same speech. Much of the reporting concentrated on its most confrontational moments while paying far less attention to the record of American renewal he presented. This goes beyond a partisan filter. There is a deep contempt for President Trump that makes many of his critics incapable of acknowledging anything good associated with him, regardless of the evidence. They have lost what Jewish tradition calls the ayin tovah—the good eye: the willingness to recognize what is good, even when it comes from someone they dislike.

And if any regime deserves to be confronted, it is the one ruling Iran. This is not merely another government with which America has policy differences. It is an authoritarian theocracy that brutally represses the Iranian people, finances armed proxies, threatens Israel and its neighbors, and has obstructed full verification of its nuclear activities. Thank God our president has the courage to stand against it. Confronting such a regime requires strength, leadership, and a clear distinction between the Iranian people and the evil, apocalyptic autocracy that rules over them.

Source appendix

Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Situation, August 2026; Productivity and Costs, second quarter 2026; Consumer Price Index.

U.S. Census Bureau, Income and Poverty in the United States and Income data.

Bureau of Economic Analysis, Foreign direct investment in the United States.

Energy Information Administration, Record energy production in 2025 and LNG export growth in 2026.

Department of Defense, Fiscal 2025 recruiting results; U.S. Army, Fiscal 2026 recruiting results.

FBI, 2025 reported crime statistics.

CDC, Provisional overdose death estimates.

NATO, The Hague Summit Declaration.

The White House, Western Hemisphere trade frameworks and 2025 National Security Strategy.

Israel Ministry of Defense, Record 2025 defense exports and U.S.–Israel defense partnership talks; Bank of Israel, September 2026 economic update.

Additional agency releases: U.S. Customs and Border Protection border statistics; FBI Ten Most Wanted announcements; National Park Service fountain restoration updates; White House and Department of Defense military program releases.

The figures above distinguish measured results from announced plans and commitments. No single statistic establishes how much of an outcome was caused by any one president or policy.

THE 5% WARNING

The Fiscal Story We Have Not Finished Telling 

By Jonah Ritter · September 16, 2026 

A 10-year Treasury yield near 5% gets my attention. The last time we saw a rate around this level was before the financial crisis. That does not mean another crisis is imminent. But it does raise a fair question: Are investors demanding a higher return because they expect stronger growth, because inflation may persist, or because lending to a heavily indebted government for ten years now requires a bigger premium? 

The answer matters. A 10-year yield reflects expectations about future short-term rates, inflation, and compensation for holding a long-term bond. It is not a direct reading of today's inflation rate. Nor does every dollar of existing federal debt immediately refinance at the new yield. But as maturing debt is replaced and new deficits are financed, higher rates steadily raise the government's interest bill.  

That creates the feedback loop I worry about: more interest expense adds to the deficit; the deficit adds to the debt; and a larger debt can push interest expense higher still. The danger grows if investors begin to doubt that economic growth and federal revenue can keep pace. 

The deficit Trump walked into 

We should start with the calendar. On January 17, 2025—before President Trump took office—the Congressional Budget Office projected a $1.9 trillion deficit for fiscal 2025, a fiscal year that was already more than three months underway. It also projected federal debt held by the public rising from about 100% of GDP in 2025 to 118% in 2035 under the laws then in place. Those projections show that the debt and much of the 2025 deficit were inherited. They do not mean every subsequent outcome belongs to a previous administration. CBO's January 2025 outlook. 

By February 2026, CBO still projected an approximately $1.9 trillion deficit for fiscal 2026 and debt reaching 120% of GDP in 2036. Its update also shows why attribution has to be honest: CBO estimated that the 2025 reconciliation law and immigration-related administrative actions increased projected cumulative deficits, while higher tariffs reduced them. A president inherits a budget trajectory and then changes it, for better or worse, through policy and economic results. CBO's February 2026 outlook. 

Why cuts can take time to appear 

An announcement is not the same as a lower Treasury payment. Some employees who accepted the administration's deferred resignation offer continued receiving pay and benefits through September 30, 2025. In those cases, the payroll benefit would begin later. Other personnel reductions may involve severance, accrued leave, continuing benefits, or work shifted to contractors. The relevant figure is the net reduction in actual spending, not the number of departures announced. Office of Personnel Management's deferred resignation FAQ. 

Fraud and waste work the same way. Identifying an improper payment does not instantly put cash back in the Treasury. Savings appear when future payments are stopped; recoveries appear when money is actually collected. Some discoveries may prevent large future losses even if the deficit in the discovery year barely changes. And an estimated improper payment is not automatically proof of fraud or a sum that can all be recovered. 

There is also a scale problem. Federal civilian payroll is one component of a budget dominated by Social Security, health programs, defense, and interest. Genuine administrative savings matter, but they must be large and sustained to move a deficit measured in trillions. 

What is happening beneath the headline? 

One useful measure is the primary deficit: the deficit with net interest costs removed. It tells us whether current revenue covers current noninterest spending. It is a clearer way to spot operating improvements, although it does not make interest disappear from the government's actual bills. 

CBO projects a primary deficit of 2.6% of GDP for fiscal 2026. Its August monthly review shows that, through the first eleven months of the fiscal year, net interest outlays were $111 billion higher than in the comparable 2025 period. After adjusting for shifts in payment dates, the primary deficit was modestly lower than a year earlier. That offers some evidence of improvement beneath the headline, but not enough yet to establish a lasting turnaround. 

CBO's 2026 outlook; CBO's August 2026 budget review. 

There is a legitimate case for patience: inherited commitments, payroll arrangements, contracts, and enforcement changes take time to show up in cash spending. But 2028 is a testable hypothesis, not a guaranteed payoff date. We should expect to see measurable improvement in the primary deficit and debt relative to the economy as those changes mature. 

What the deficit builds

The deficit tells us how much the government must borrow. It does not tell us whether the money paid for ongoing expenses or helped build something the economy can use for years. Congress provided $12.5 billion to begin modernizing the air traffic control system, replacing aging equipment and facilities. In September 2026, the Transportation Department announced $1.1 billion in airport grants for projects including runways, terminals, a control tower, and equipment that helps controllers track vehicles on the ground. Construction also began this year on the replacement Blatnik Bridge, a freight and commuter link between Minnesota and Wisconsin, using a federal grant awarded in 2024. FAA; Transportation Department airport grants; Transportation Department bridge announcement.

These projects still cost money, and their value depends on finishing them efficiently. But safer flights, more reliable bridges, and less congested airports can support commerce long after the construction bills are paid. When we judge federal spending, we should ask not only “How much did it cost?” but also “What did the country gain?”

Signs the economy may have more room to grow

There is also good news that deserves attention. In the second quarter of 2026, real GDP grew at a 1.5% annual rate, while real final sales to private domestic purchasers grew 4.2%. That second measure captures household spending and private fixed investment and suggests firmer underlying private demand than the headline GDP number alone. It is one quarter, not a settled growth trend. Bureau of Economic Analysis. 

Capital is still coming into American businesses. Foreign investors spent $232.2 billion acquiring, establishing, or expanding U.S. businesses in 2025, up 49.5% from 2024; manufacturing accounted for 52.5% of the total. Most of that money purchased existing businesses, so it would be misleading to call the entire amount new factories. The longer-term opportunity is for ownership, new plant construction, equipment spending, and supplier investment to turn into more output here. Bureau of Economic Analysis. 

The 2025 investment figures do not capture the scale of what has since been announced. President Trump has spoken of trillions of dollars in planned U.S. investment, and the "White House lists commitments" from American companies and foreign governments across manufacturing, technology, energy, and infrastructure. In 2026, the United States and Japan selected the first projects under Japan’s $550 billion investment commitment, showing how a broad pledge can begin to take shape in specific projects. This is a substantial potential source of future growth. The announced totals cover different years and types of commitments, however, including planned spending and purchases; they are not a measure of money already invested or factories already producing. The test is how much becomes financed construction, equipment, jobs, and output in the United States. U.S. Department of Commerce." 

New factories and AI infrastructure can expand capacity, and AI tools could raise what each worker produces. Those gains would help businesses earn more, pay higher wages, and generate tax revenue without requiring a higher tax rate. But productivity gains are earned through deployment and actual output, not through announcements of future projects. Manufacturing construction has been substantial, though recent construction data also show a slowdown from its earlier pace. Federal Reserve monetary policy report; Census construction spending release. 

Allied defense spending adds another potential source of demand for American manufacturing. NATO reports that European allies and Canada increased core defense expenditure by nearly 20% in 2025 compared with 2024. Allies have also committed to invest 5% of GDP in defense and related security needs by 2035, including at least 3.5% for core defense. That creates opportunities for U.S. producers and suppliers of air defense systems, aircraft, electronics, drones, and emerging autonomous technologies. Successful exports could support factory expansion, skilled jobs, research, and earnings here at home. The spending targets do not guarantee U.S. orders: allies may buy from their own industries, and contracts take time to become production and revenue. NATO's 2026 spending update; The Hague Summit Declaration. 

Public safety belongs in the economic picture

Crime takes a toll that a GDP table cannot fully show. Violence destroys lives and property; addiction tears through families and workplaces; fear changes where people shop, invest, hire, and raise children. Safer communities can make it easier for businesses to operate and for people to participate in the economy. That benefit matters even when it cannot be converted into a neat deficit estimate. 

The border numbers changed quickly after the administration took office. DHS reported that encounters with gotaways—people detected crossing who evaded apprehension—were down about 95% during Trump's first 100 days. In June 2026, DHS reported 13 consecutive months with no Border Patrol releases at the border. That describes a specific release practice for people apprehended by Border Patrol; it does not mean no one entered the country unlawfully or that every type of admission ended. The abrupt change is an important result of the administration's border policy, though a claim about its precise effect on nationwide crime would require separate evidence. DHS first-100-days report; DHS June 2026 release. 

The broader public safety numbers are striking. The FBI estimates that violent crime fell 9.3% in 2025, the largest one-year decline in its national violent-crime rate estimates since they began in 1936. Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter fell 18.1%, robbery 18.5%, aggravated assault 7.2%, and rape 7.6%. Property crime fell 12.4%, including a 22.7% drop in motor vehicle theft. The estimated murder rate of 4.1 per 100,000 tied the rates recorded in 1955 and 1956. These are national estimates based on crimes reported to participating agencies. FBI 2025 crime report; FBI account of the decline. 

Drug deaths offer another measure of human and economic relief. The CDC's provisional estimates show opioid-involved overdose deaths fell about 19%, from 55,296 in 2024 to 44,564 in 2025. DEA testing found that the share of fentanyl pills it analyzed containing a potentially lethal dose fell from 76% in fiscal 2023 to 29% in fiscal 2025. That is a comparison of tested pills, not proof that all fentanyl sold in America became equally less dangerous. The DEA also reports major seizures, although seizure totals alone cannot tell us how much drug supply ultimately reached users. CDC provisional 2025 data; DEA fentanyl testing and seizures. 

We should give credit for the sharp border shift and take the 2025 crime decline seriously. We should also get the timeline right: overdose deaths were already falling before January 2025, and a nationwide crime total does not by itself identify which federal, state, or local policy caused the decline. That is precisely why critical thinking matters. When we look only at the deficit, we miss gains in safety and human welfare. When we attribute every favorable statistic to one election, we miss the evidence that would tell us which improvements can last. CDC on the earlier overdose decline. 

The growth case—and its test 

A strong economy can make a large debt easier to carry because the denominator—GDP—grows, incomes and tax receipts rise, and the government has more capacity to service what it owes. That may be one reason some investors are willing to give the fiscal story more time. Still, growth alone cannot be assumed to outrun persistent primary deficits and rising interest costs. Strong demand can also keep inflation and long-term rates elevated; the second-quarter PCE price index rose at a 5.3% annualized rate, a reminder that the inflation question has not vanished. Bureau of Economic Analysis. 

The 10-year yield may be telling us several things at once: America has real prospects for investment and growth, while lenders want greater compensation for inflation uncertainty and a large supply of government debt. We cannot know the precise mix from the yield alone. 

I am willing to give delayed savings and new investment time to work. But the evidence I want to see is concrete: sustained productivity and private investment, a falling primary deficit, interest costs stabilizing relative to federal revenue, and debt no longer growing faster than the economy. If those measures improve, a 5% Treasury yield will look more like the price of a growing economy. If they do not, it will look more like a warning we should have taken seriously.

HISTORY MAY JUDGE DIFFERENTLY

By Jonah Ritter

Standing before the Lincoln Memorial today, it is easy to imagine that Abraham Lincoln was always revered. He was not. During his presidency, opponents in the North as well as the South attacked his judgment, his character, and the war he led. His 1860 victory came with less than half the popular vote in a four-way contest. The nation that later placed him in a marble temple had once been bitterly divided over him.

The contrast is striking, but it needs one important detail: Americans began proposing a national monument soon after his death. In 1867, Congress created the Lincoln Monument Association. Political disagreements and practical problems stalled its plan. Construction of the memorial we know began in 1914, and its dedication came in 1922—fifty-seven years after Lincoln's death. The National Park Service tells that history plainly.

Time did not make every argument against Lincoln vanish. It gave later generations a fuller view of the Union he preserved and the emancipation he advanced. Imagine the United States if the seceding states had become a permanent separate nation. We cannot prove what that country, or ours, would have become. Yet asking what a decision prevented is part of judging what it accomplished.

That is what comes to mind as I watch Washington change today. President Trump's planned White House ballroom is being judged while construction and controversy are still fresh. People have real questions about its size, design, cost, and the changes to the East Wing. Future presidents may have a different question: does this room allow the White House to host the large events it has long struggled to accommodate? Decades of use will tell us something that today's renderings cannot.

Rendering of the 250th anniversary arch planned for Memorial Circle, where preparatory excavation has been announced.”

The proposed arch commemorating America's 250th anniversary makes the Lincoln comparison even more direct. It is a monument, meant to outlive the administration that proposed it. The National Capital Planning Commission advanced preliminary site and building plans in July 2026. That approval does not settle whether the arch should be built, whether its scale belongs in that setting, or what visitors will think of it fifty years from now. It does mean that today's political debate is only the opening chapter of its possible history.

Washington's public spaces during a season of restoration—fountains, sculpture, and monuments receiving renewed attention for America's 250th year.

There is also less dramatic work underway: taking care of the capital we already have. The National Park Service describes a broad effort to repair Washington's historic fountains, stonework, sculpture, and public spaces in time for the anniversary and beyond. The Columbus Circle fountain at Union Station returned to operation in 2026 after being silent since 2007. The Meridian Hill cascade has reopened, and the gilded equestrian groups near the Lincoln Memorial have received attention as well. My collage illustrates the work at several familiar landmarks. It is fair to scrutinize workmanship and expense; it is also fair to ask what long neglect would have cost them.

The most consequential question, however, may not involve marble, gold, or water. It may involve Iran. Without American action against Iran's nuclear facilities, how much closer might the regime have come to a nuclear weapon? That is a counterfactual, not a fact we can measure. The strikes damaged facilities and set back activity, but the length of that setback cannot yet be established. In September 2026, the International Atomic Energy Agency said it lacked access to affected facilities and could not verify previously declared enriched uranium. I hope the danger has been halted for a long time. I cannot honestly say inspectors have confirmed that the entire program has ended.

A suitable landing for the Commander in Chief: The South Lawn has long welcomed Marine One. This before-and-after comparison shows how the landing area might be given a more fitting appearance beside the White House.

There is a second possibility in Iran that makes the Lincoln analogy more human. If the Iranian people gain the freedom to choose a government that represents them instead of the Islamic revolutionary regime, that would be an emancipation in their own right. It would belong to them, not to an American president. And as Lincoln's story reminds us, freedom brings the hard work of building a durable nation after a profound division.

I am not claiming that Trump is Lincoln, or that a ballroom is a memorial. I am asking how we judge a contested undertaking while we are still standing inside the contest. A building's usefulness emerges over years. A restored fountain proves itself by continuing to run. A monument takes meaning from generations who visit it. And the full consequences of a decision about Iran will depend on a future that has not arrived.

Lincoln's memorial offers no guarantee about any of these outcomes. It offers a caution about certainty. History sees farther than a headline can.

SAME PLAYBOOK, NEW TEAM, NEW PLAYERS

In the 1930s, economic desperation made many Germans receptive to Hitler’s promises and restored national greatness. He exploited existing antisemitism, falsely blaming Jews for Germany’s hardships and giving frustrated people a target for their anger. His appeal combined a promised better future with scapegoating and national grievance. 

The DSA isn't a "Party" yet. But they are writing the script. Blaming Israel, billionaires, capitalism, Trump and MAGA is reviving old evil spirits.

Who will the Left cast for the part of the charismatic, convincing orator? Bernie's too old. AOC says too many stupid things. They need a fresh face without prior political baggage, but with enough political credibility to fool the masses. Hmmm, who could it be?  

I am not saying that the DSA represents the return of the NAZI party!! I am saying it is a deceptively dangerous political movement that threatens the American way of life.

Time can provide evidence to assess the comparison. A rapid rise in popularity alone shows growing influence, but not dangerous intent. More telling would be whether that growth accompanies collective scapegoating, acceptance of political violence, suppression of dissent. Those are observable tests.

HERE IS A CLUE

In the book "Hitler’s Professors" from 1946 by survivor Max Weinreich, he details how the masses were brought into power by the universities and far left. 

Clue: Zohran Mamdani was groomed by his far left-wing parents to become a radical activist in the Communist mold. His father, Mahmood Mamdani, was a Marxist and a Professor at Columbia University.

Look Up In The Sky

During the 30s in America, we saw the rise of the comic book character "Superman." He was able to leap tall buildings and defended the "American Way." Hmmm, who could that be. 

Hilter's propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels accused Superman of being a Jew.

Some years back, I blogged about Superman as a quasi-messiah figure in a post I titled "Superman As A savior." 

VISIONING A BETTER WORLD CONTINUED

VISIONING A BETTER WORLD: THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

Visioning A Better World Part I

Rubio’s effort to strengthen regional partnerships connects American security to the resources and industrial capacity our future requires.

In “Visioning a Better World,” I explored the greater promise of the Abraham Accords: nations can create practical reasons for peace through trade, investment, and security cooperation. Shared prosperity gives people something valuable to protect.

That discussion also pointed toward a shift in America’s own hemisphere. This follow-up explores why that shift matters.

America cannot afford to surrender its industrial capacity or become excessively dependent on China for the materials that keep our industries operating. Bringing factories home is only part of the task. Those factories need dependable access to resources, facilities that process them, and transportation networks that deliver them.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s regional diplomacy belongs in that larger discussion. Strengthening relationships in the Americas can improve security while creating opportunities for more resilient economic partnerships. The question is how to turn those opportunities into lasting results.

Factories Need More Than a Flag

A factory built on American soil still depends on its supply chain. Its production can be interrupted if an essential material becomes unavailable, a processing facility shuts down, or a shipping route is disrupted.

Copper, lithium, graphite, and rare earth elements serve different purposes, but all illustrate the relationship between materials and modern industrial production. Building American capacity requires attention to every stage: extraction, processing, components, and finished products.

China’s position is particularly significant in processing. The International Energy Agency’s 2025 assessment identified China as the dominant refiner for 19 of 20 strategic minerals examined, with an average market share of approximately 70%. The agency also documented expanding Chinese export restrictions affecting industrial materials and processing technologies. IEA assessment

That concentration creates a vulnerability. Commercial access today does not guarantee uninterrupted access during a diplomatic or economic confrontation.

The goal should be reliable alternatives. Trade can continue while American companies develop additional suppliers and processing capacity. Greater choice strengthens our ability to make decisions in our own national interest.

Rubio and the Regional Map

During Rubio’s September visit, Peru announced that it would join the U.S.-led Shield of the Americas. The coalition focuses on intelligence sharing and cooperation against transnational criminal organizations. His visit followed stops in Colombia and Ecuador and formed part of Washington’s broader effort to strengthen regional relationships and counter growing Chinese influence. Reuters report

The immediate security purpose matters on its own. Criminal networks cross borders, and governments need dependable partners to exchange information and coordinate lawful responses.

There is also a broader strategic possibility. Regular cooperation builds relationships between officials and institutions. Those relationships can support discussions about investment, transportation, infrastructure, and the security of commercial systems.

This is the sense in which Rubio is trying to redraw the map: strengthening the network of governments willing to work with Washington. The boundaries remain the same; the relationships may change.

Why Peru Matters

Peru connects the security discussion to natural resources. It is a major copper producer, and China remains its largest export market, principally because of copper and other mineral exports. Reuters trade report

Peru is also part of an existing American supply relationship. In the figures reported by Reuters in February 2025, Chile, Canada, and Peru together supplied more than 90% of U.S. refined copper imports. Hemispheric partnerships already help sustain American industry. Reuters copper overview

Security alignment, however, does not automatically redirect commerce. Peru’s participation in the Shield does not itself establish mineral purchase agreements, change infrastructure ownership, or create new refineries.

Its continuing trade with China makes the challenge clear. Washington must offer practical economic opportunities alongside security cooperation. Partners have their own interests, customers, and development needs.

Partnerships Must Deliver

The earlier article emphasized that cooperation becomes durable when ordinary people gain something from it. That principle applies here too.

Regional governments need investment, employment, dependable markets, and infrastructure. American businesses need reliable supplies, predictable contracts, and conditions that justify long-term commitments. Agreements that address both sets of needs have a stronger foundation.

For America, a serious industrial strategy would connect domestic production with trusted external suppliers. It would support processing capacity, recycling, and transportation alongside new factories. The IEA identifies international partnerships linking resource-rich countries, processing capabilities, and industrial consumers as important to diversifying concentrated supply chains. IEA assessment

Such investments have costs and tradeoffs. New facilities take time, communities have legitimate concerns, and alternative supplies may initially be more expensive. Those considerations belong in the calculation alongside the potential cost of a major interruption.

Dependability has economic value. A supplier’s price means less if the required material cannot arrive when production needs it.

A Shared Principle Across Two Regions

The Abraham Accords and the Shield of the Americas have different purposes. The Accords concern diplomatic normalization; the Shield concerns cooperation against transnational crime. Their results should be assessed against those respective goals.

Yet the comparison offers a useful principle: sovereign nations can develop relationships around shared interests and practical benefits.

In the Middle East, my earlier article explored how cooperation could create reasons to preserve peace. In the Americas, stronger security relationships may also create opportunities to build dependable economic connections.

Neither outcome is automatic. Diplomatic announcements begin a process. Investment, institutional cooperation, and tangible benefits determine whether it lasts.

The Work Behind the Vision

America’s industrial future requires attention to the entire chain that makes production possible. Our regional diplomacy and our domestic economic decisions need to work together.

Rubio’s engagement provides an opportunity to strengthen that connection. Its significance will ultimately depend on what follows: effective security cooperation, durable commercial agreements, and investments that expand the choices available to America and its partners.

A better world needs productive nations capable of cooperating from a position of confidence. For America, that means preserving the ability to build, obtaining the resources we need, and developing partnerships that can withstand pressure.

In my previous article, I suggested double-checking the seating chart.

This time, we should also check who supplies the table—and whether we can still build one ourselves.