Congress Debates Dangerous Bill Handing Sweeping Tariff Powers to President, Threatening Working Families
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
A House bill that would allow the president to impose 100% tariffs on countries buying Russian oil faces strong opposition from Democrats, who warn it could hike prices for ordinary Americans and be abused for political gain, while its backers claim it would pressure Russia over its war in Ukraine.
Congress is preparing to vote on the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia Act of 2026, a deeply troubling piece of legislation that would hand the president unchecked authority to impose 100% tariffs on imports of Russian oil and related products, including from countries like China and India. This measure, co-authored by the late Senator Lindsey Graham—a longtime hawk on foreign policy—targets Russia’s energy and defense sectors and its so-called 'shadow fleet' of tankers, but at what cost to ordinary people?
Democratic leaders on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the Joint Economic Committee, and the Ways and Means Committee have sounded the alarm, warning that the bill would 'dramatically expand presidential tariff authorities while failing to mandate sanctions on Russia, both of which are unacceptable.' They point out that this reckless proposal could drive up prices for working families in the United States and erode the broad, principled support for Ukraine by turning the issue into a partisan weapon.
'This bill would do more harm than good,' the Democratic statement read, highlighting the real risks to the American people.
Republican support for this dangerous expansion of executive power appears limited to a small group of hardliners, making Democratic resistance crucial to protecting democratic checks and balances. Behind closed doors, negotiations are underway to narrow the list of countries subject to secondary sanctions, with an amendment identifying ten specific nations—yet this only underscores the arbitrary nature of the bill.
Ukrainian officials, desperate for any action, have welcomed the effort. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy urged Congress to pass the bill, describing it as necessary to increase economic pressure on Russia. Veteran affairs minister Vitaly Kim echoed this, insisting that sanctions are the quickest way to weaken Russia’s war machine, but without regard for the collateral damage to global and domestic economies.
The debate comes as many fear that expanding presidential tariff powers could backfire, being used against U.S. allies as seen when previous administrations imposed tariffs on Canada and Mexico. Critics within the Democratic caucus have warned that this legislation could become yet another partisan bargaining chip in the run-up to elections, undermining real solidarity with Ukraine and hurting everyday Americans.
Advocacy groups supporting Ukraine have praised the bill as a tool to drain Russian war funds, but even they acknowledge the need for broader consensus and caution against the divisive, heavy-handed approach embodied in this legislation.