Some of us have been saying for months that this dude should have just listened to himself:
Posted on 09/22/2026 5:37:59 AM PDT by Miami Rebel
Senate Republicans are clashing over a proposal endorsed by Sen. Chuck Grassley (Iowa) and other farm-state Republicans to embargo the export of diesel to increase supply and lower prices at home, something U.S. leaders last implemented during the 1970s energy crisis.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) is open to the idea, but oil-state Republicans have slammed the proposal as a “gimmick.” The soaring cost of diesel is putting political pressure on Republicans in farm states such as Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska, where Democrats now have a chance to win Senate seats that weren’t viewed as competitive a year ago.
The double whammy of President Trump’s global trade war, which has impacted commodities such as pork and soybeans, and the mounting cost of fuel and fertilizer has put farmers in a foul mood, and some Senate Republicans fear an angry backlash in key red states. “Why doesn’t Pres Trump put an embargo on diesel exports like presidents in the 70s put embargoes on ag[riculture] products bc [because] food prices were inflated,” Grassley posted on social media over the weekend. “High diesel prices ARE KILLING FARMERS INCOME,” he declared.
Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa), who is neck and neck with her Democratic opponent Josh Turek in the polls, endorsed an embargo on diesel exports Monday and blamed Trump’s months-long war with Iran for pushing up fuel prices.
“Iowans are being squeezed and shouldn’t have to foot the bill at the pump or the checkout line for the war in Iran. We need to use every option at our disposal to provide some relief from high prices,” Hinson posted Monday on social platform X. She called for suspending the gas tax, pausing diesel exports and loosening restrictions on gas with higher blends of ethanol. Thune said he’s open to the idea of limiting diesel exports, an echo of the mid 1970s when the Ford and Carter administrations halted most crude oil exports to stabilize prices in response to the oil shock created by the oil embargo imposed against the United States by members of OPEC.
“The export ban, honestly, makes probably more sense to me. I think that suspending the [gas] tax is a short-term thing and then you create holes in the Highway Trust Fund,” he said. But Republicans from oil-producing states are pushing back hard on the proposed diesel export ban, which could depress prices for producers based in their home states.
“It’s a gimmick,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who represents the biggest oil-producing state in the nation. Mike Sommers, the president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, warned that pausing the export of diesel would “make the problem worse” because it would lead to a glut of supply in Gulf Coast states and could make costs rise in other parts of the country because of imbalances in the broader oil market. “Americans are hurting from rising diesel prices, and policymakers are understandably searching for answers. But restricting U.S. diesel exports would make the problem worse, not better — for consumers, farmers and the broader U.S. economy,” Sommers posted on X.
“Most U.S. diesel production is concentrated on the Gulf Coast, which produces more fuel than the region can consume. Meanwhile, other parts of the country rely on imports because of geography and infrastructure constraints,” he said. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) was cool to the idea of an oil export ban when asked about the idea early last week. Murkowski sounded more receptive to the idea later in the week but expressed concern that shutting down oil exports might not “move the needle.”
“We actually produce more than we consume here, produce more diesel in this country than we consume,” she said. “We’re talking about global supply, so I worry that we do something in the short-term … that doesn’t really move the needle. “It sounds interesting and intriguing as, ‘OK, what are we going to do if we’re facing high prices?” she added. Murkowski played a role in lifting the 1970s-era oil export ban more than 10 years ago.
“We have seen the prices of fuel and related products — diesel, other refined products, fertilizer — we’ve seen all that rise as a consequence of what we’re seeing in Iran,” she said. Residents of Alaska are now spending more than $3,000 annually per capita on diesel and home heating oil, more than residents of any other state in the country. The United States had an oil export ban in place for 40 years, from 1975 to 2015, and then lifted it after domestic oil production boomed because technological advances enabled U.S. companies to extract oil from shale reserves more efficiently.
The lifting of the export ban was supported at the time from now-Sens. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) and Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). Other Republicans argue it would make more sense to pursue other options, such as reopening two large refineries in California. “I’d want to see how they would do it,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said of a potential ban on oil exports. “The bigger problem we’ve got right now is, as I understand it, in California we’ve already lost two more refineries because of California’s strict environmental rules,” he said. “They’ve shut down two more refineries. I would like to get those back up and operational again.
“That might very well help a lot of our domestic needs right here in the United States. It seems to me that refining is going to be a bigger issue here than a lot of people thought.” Barrasso warned that banning diesel exports is a complex issue given the interconnected web of economic transactions across the United States. He argued that high diesel prices would be temporary because of the conflict with Iran.
“What we do in Wyoming, you know, we import diesel from Canada. We refine it and then send it back. So the president will consider a number of things,” he said. “What we need to do is when the war is over, prices are going to come down and stay down significantly,” Barrasso predicted.
National average diesel prices hit an all-time high Monday, reaching $6.51 cents per gallon. Diesel cost $3.52 a gallon on average before the United States and Israel launched strikes against Iran, which led to a months-long conflict that has dramatically slowed oil shipments through the Persian Gulf.
Grassley has been in Congress long enough to have been around when this bad idea failed the first time.
Maybe he’s just forgotten.
The export ban would indeed lower prices.
Which is why Deep State opposes it.
The ban would also put pressure on our republic’s enemies with regard to other issues.
Another reason Deep State opposes it.
Mr. President, you rule.
As an alternative, a two tier pricing scale could be established.
Exports are priced at the world maarket level.
Domestic sales are priced at the cost + overhead and profit within the 50 states as normal commerce
If I thought of it President Trump most certainly will.
My diesel Sprinter van is parked.
Perhaps GOP candidates running against the Iran War will make clear to Trump why he needs to arrange a fake truce with Iran this week, “re-open” Hormuz and get crude prices back below $70 ASAP. Or November is likely to be a bloodbath.
Generally, I am opposed to this idea too.
HOWEVER,
“We actually produce more than we consume here, produce more diesel in this country than we consume,”
According to Murkowski, this is the case. IF, we FORCE more diesel into OUR markets by increasing supply the price will go down. Isn’t that just basic economic theory?
What am I missing?
Or does this just reduce the profits that oil refiners are currently making. Which is not what the corporations behind the Senator want.
Here in NH almost all our diesel/gasoline comes from either James Irving’s refinery in New Brunswick or the ones in Newark, NJ. I could be wrong, but I do not think there are vessels of diesel/heating oil coming all the way uip here from the Gulf of America.
You miss the point as you hide behind your terrorist loving mask
For the world to be put right, the total extermination of the terrorist regime in Iran must continue. Democrats and those like you are terrorist promoters and for the sake of America must also be obliterated
"It's a gimmick," said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who represents the biggest oil-producing state in the nation.
How many apparatchiks do you estimate we need to hire at the new Bureau of Domestic Fuel Price Determination, comrade?
This is a I am running for REELECTION ploy, IMHO.
Meaning, I am trying to APPEAR to help the average VOTER, when really (even more important for the Senator) BIG AGRICULTURE. All the big corporate farmers that are majorly impacted by the increase in diesel at harvest time. The corporations that get Grassley elected.
I am a lumber broker. As part of my DAILY business we have to quote delivered to our customers based on what we perceive the freight we will pay to transport lumber and from point A to B. When we take an order based on what we last paid and then the freight goes UP. We EAT the difference. We can not go back to the customer and ask for a higher price to get the product delivered to them. They would tell us to pound sand.
This primarily effects trucking freight. I will give you a current example. Last month we sold some lumber from a mill in WA to Utah for shipment a couple weeks out. We based it on what we had previously been paying for freight. Which was $2900.
We are getting quoted $3500-4000 currently. We made about $500 profit on the load. So, we will end up maybe breaking even or losing $500 on the trade to get it currently delivered to Utah. So, the freight has increased 18-28% in the last month.
Some of us have been saying for months that this dude should have just listened to himself:
Tell states like NY and California to stop charging taxes on gas until the world market changes.
Go f**k yourself, retard. I am well aware of what must be done. But it will be a lot harder to complete with a Democrat Congress.
Sure (reelection ploy) —
But as you point out - *contract* prices up and down the chain. 6 weeks out from the election - even if diesel prices were to move as hoped under the ploy (and no guarantee they would), it’s already getting to be too late to have a meaningful impact... let’s not forget, early voting in Iowa, Texas, and elsewhere starts in about 3 weeks.
Moreover, Patrick de Haan wrote a lengthy piece skeptical about such an export ban just yesterday. Worth the read —https://gaspriceguy.substack.com/p/why-a-diesel-export-ban-wont-fix
Bad idea, Americans should have to compete with the world to buy diesel. If they aren’t willing to pay for it that is just too bad, ship it to someone who will.
What is funny in my industry is that the railroads constantly add FUEL SURCHARGES based on the current price of diesel. When they contract out about two years in advance with futures contracts on diesel.
What I mean is it is not like the BNSF railroad stops the locomotive at the station to fill up based on todays pricing.
The current changes in the price of diesel will not really effect the railroads cost until 2028. Yet, they will raise their fuel surcharge on October first and again on November, December, etc. Typically 2-4% each month. Then they will announce new rates for 2027 sometime in November.
The pricing will be determined by the sellers for the American market.
The government need not be involved in setting the price. The sellers all know what the domestic market price should be
————-
The government site EIA.gov is a very interesting and useful site that documents everything hydrocarbon related to the USA.
One current item in the news and market is the ‘shortage’ of domestic automotive lubricants (motor oil) and the now growing costs and lack of supply at stores & shops.
The EIA.gov documents changes in US exports of lubricants thus reducing domestic supply.
Anyone can use the site to track domestic supply and exports of hydrocarbon energy and it’s direct effect on domestic pricing.
—————-
EIA.gov
All of you are of course totally wrong. You lack the capability to understand what is actually underway. You have an extremely narrow and totally incorrect view of the present.
The present is not 2019
The world must be free of the Iranian terrorists.
What the President realized was that his efforts to establish the Abraham Accords and the follow up Negev Summit was purposely thwarted by Iran and their terrorist Hamas army intent on creating the chaos that effectively destroyed his efforts. The peace the President designed and implemented was never going to happen so long as Iran found it to be intolerable.
When Israel and Saudi Arabia came on the verge of truly historic mutual efforts, Iran determined that must never be. Iran released the Hamas dogs on Israel to create the peace ending chaos.
But that would defeat the purpose of jacking prices right before midterms, wouldn’t it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.