The key facts
- The US and Israel war against Iran, which began on February 28, disrupted shipping in the Strait of Hormuz for several weeks
- Gasoline in the US has risen in price by more than 40% since the start of Trump's term — to about $1.13 per liter
- Democrats are making the war and prices a central theme against members of the foreign affairs committees
The war as an electoral vulnerability
The Donald Trump administration's war against Iran has become a problem for Republicans a week before the midterm congressional elections, writes The National. Democrats are linking support for the conflict to rising fuel prices and, in their words, to Trump's lack of a clear plan for ending the war. The issue is moving to the center of the agenda: according to an AP-Norc poll, about eight in ten registered voters want the new Congress to make lowering the cost of living a priority, and many are also demanding an end to the war in Iran.
The economic backdrop of the conflict
The conflict, which the United States began together with Israel on February 28, disrupted traffic through the Strait of Hormuz for several weeks and contributed to gasoline prices in the US rising to about $1.13 per liter. According to the outlet, that is more than 40% above the level at the start of Trump's term, although by the standards of developed countries the price remains low. Additional pressure comes from a Reuters/Ipsos poll: 78% of Americans blame Trump's policies for prices rising faster than incomes.
Vulnerable Republicans on the committees
Several prominent supporters of the war have come under fire. Senator Dan Sullivan of Alaska, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, voted against the September resolution demanding that Trump end the war or seek congressional authorization, and is now running an unexpectedly competitive campaign against Democrat Mary Peltola — recent polls show a slight lead for his rival. In August, the group VoteVets launched a $225,000 advertising campaign against him; its senior adviser Max Rose said: 'Alaskans are already paying more for everything, and Dan Sullivan voted 12 times to make it worse.' The race is complicated by a namesake on the ballot — Daniel J. Sullivan: last week the Justice Department sued Alaska election officials, seeking to block certification of the results in the event of the incumbent senator's defeat due to possible voter confusion.
Nebraska, New York and Kansas
His committee colleague Pete Ricketts in Nebraska, who also voted against the September resolution, is facing off against independent Dan Osborn — polls show a nearly even contest in a state that has not elected a Democrat to the Senate in 20 years. In New York, House Foreign Affairs Committee member Mike Lawler is contesting against Democrat Kat Conley: according to a September Emerson College poll, 52% of voters in the district oppose military action in Iran and 37% support it, while Conley leads Lawler 48–46% with a margin of error of 4.9 points. Finally, Senator Roger Marshall, who in March voted against restricting Trump's military powers, has faced a competitive race against Democrat Adam Hamilton in Kansas — a Republican stronghold that Trump won in 2024 by about 16 percentage points.
What these campaigns show
The common denominator of the races listed is the combination of a foreign policy position with voters' economic anxiety: all the mentioned legislators voted against restricting the president's military powers, and polls in their states and districts show either an advantage for their opponents or a statistical tie. The outlet also notes that in Lawler's race, support for Israel plays a notable role — both candidates are competing for Jewish voters' votes, arguing over who will better protect Israel and combat antisemitism. The elections themselves will take place next week; the outcomes of these campaigns will show how much the war in Iran is actually affecting the balance in Congress.
