Yes, Let’s Talk About High Diesel Prices
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
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























