US Democrats appear to be sharpening their attacks on President Donald Trump over the economic fallout from the Iran war as rising fuel and household costs become an increasingly potent issue ahead of November’s midterm elections.
The growing criticism comes as the national average gasoline price has again climbed above $4 a gallon and Democrats show signs of eroding what has traditionally been a Republican advantage with voters on the economy. Gas prices have risen by more than 25% since the Iran war began in February.
Rep. Nikki Budzinski of Illinois pointed Thursday to the latest increase in gasoline prices, saying the national average had reached a record for this point in the year.
“The national gas average just hit a historic high for this time of year—more than $4 a gallon,” she wrote on X. “Families in Central Illinois are paying the price of the war in Iran every single time they pull up to the pump.”
Rep. Andrea Salinas of Oregon said American farmers spent $1.4 billion more on diesel during the spring planting season than a year earlier, blaming the increase on the conflict.
“With Trump’s ILLEGAL war pushing fuel prices higher and higher, growers are the ones paying the price,” she wrote.
The attacks come as polling suggests the economy is becoming an increasingly difficult issue for Trump and Republicans three months before the November 3 midterms.
A Reuters/Ipsos poll released this month found 37% of registered voters preferred Democrats’ approach to the economy, compared with 36% who favored Republicans—the first Democratic advantage on the issue in roughly a decade.
A separate Washington Post/Ipsos poll last month found the economy and high prices were the most commonly cited factors in voters’ midterm choices, mentioned by 54% of registered voters. Only 33% approved of Trump’s handling of the economy, against 65% who disapproved.
Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts sought to connect the war with Trump’s broader economic agenda, including tariffs and tax policy.
“Trump promised to lower prices on day one,” McGovern wrote. “Instead, his billionaires-first economic policies, stupid tariffs & illegal war with Iran are pushing prices to record highs.”
“His policy choices are making your life more expensive while the ultra rich do better than ever before,” he added.
Inflation eased slightly in July but remained above levels seen before the Iran war, while consumer prices have now risen faster than wages for four consecutive months.
Sen. Bernie Sanders sharpened the argument by contrasting federal spending on the war and tax cuts with the cost pressures facing households.
“$900 million for White House vanity projects? Approved. $1 trillion tax cut for the 1%? Approved. $1 trillion for war with Iran? Approved,” Sanders wrote.
“Lower grocery, housing or gas prices? Sorry, you're on your own. Money for billionaires. Money for war. Nothing for working people.”
The growing Democratic focus on gasoline, groceries and the Iran war suggests the party sees an opportunity to turn an issue that helped return Trump to the White House in 2024 against Republicans in November.
Davoud Rangi, vice chair of the chamber’s Import Management Committee, said Iran receives around 400 to 500 ships carrying essential goods each year, making any attempt to replace maritime imports with overland transport impractical.
“Mobilizing this number of trucks is far-fetched for us, and even if they were mobilized, transportation costs would rise sharply,” Rangi told Eghtesad News on Thursday.
He said Iranian authorities should not count on land corridors as a substitute for the country’s southern ports because neighboring states could restrict border traffic at short notice and the routes lack the capacity to handle the necessary volume of goods.
Neighboring governments could close a border “with a single order,” he said, adding that the justification would not necessarily have to be political or military and could instead involve quarantine or veterinary restrictions of the kind Iran has faced before.
Rangi said land routes through countries such as Turkey or Pakistan might accommodate around one million tons of cargo annually, but could not come close to replacing Iran’s maritime trade.
“At a small scale, perhaps one million tons of cargo a year could be brought in through Turkey or Pakistan, but 23 million tons, or even half of that, is simply inconceivable,” he said.
The warning comes as Iran’s southern ports remain under pressure from the war. IRGC attacks on commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz have escalated regional tensions in recent weeks, while the United States intensified economic pressure on Tehran through a maritime blockade.
The outlook for negotiations between Tehran and Washington over reopening the Strait of Hormuz remains uncertain, with concerns also growing over a possible expansion of the regional conflict.
Negotiations seen as only viable way out
Rangi said negotiations and a reduction in military tensions were the only practical route to lifting the blockade and restoring the regular flow of essential goods into Iran.
Attempting to rely instead on overland corridors would impose heavy losses on importers, he said, because of both limited capacity and sharply higher transportation costs.
The blockade is also complicating Iranian exports, particularly containerized trade.
Rangi said vessels carrying bulk commodities could more easily be allowed to pass, while container ships pose a greater problem because individual containers cannot practically be separated from the rest of a ship’s cargo.
“We are extremely vulnerable on the southern route, in Bandar Abbas and Chabahar, but along the northern and western corridors the situation is much better for exports than for imports,” he said.
Iran’s economy has already come under mounting pressure in recent months from the continuing conflict, tighter sanctions and a sharp decline in the value of the rial.
Surging inflation and falling purchasing power have further strained household finances, making essential goods increasingly difficult to afford for a large part of the population.
