Independent Journalism · Not Legal Advice · Verify Against the Court Record · Editorial Policy
Elegant view of the US Capitol dome framed by trees, bathed in warm sunset light, Washington D.C.

Russia Deals and the Midterms: What Both Parties in Congress Have Said

by

A week before the Nov. 3 midterm elections, postwar commercial ventures, from oil to airspace, have been floated by Washington and Moscow to coax the Kremlin toward a Ukraine settlement, the Financial Times wrote on Tuesday, Oct. 27. For the Congress Russia deals midterms debate, the report lands on top of a month of bipartisan clashes with the White House over Russian diesel and a waived sanctions law.

Where it stands: Through October 28, no member of Congress was reported to have addressed the FT story itself. The AP reported that “the House and Senate are on recess until after Election Day.”

The FT’s account rests on unnamed sources. Asked about it, a US official said any economic agreements “would be included in and subject to a comprehensive peace framework that stops the killing in this brutal war; nothing is finalised.” Exxon said last year it has no plans to resume operations in Russia, and Boeing declined to comment on the titanium idea. Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin spokesman, did not reply, and envoy Kirill Dmitriev’s office declined to comment.

What follows is the record of what lawmakers have said about the October moves the FT lists as already taken, all attributed to the outlets that carried them. Nothing here predicts the election.

What have Republicans in Congress said about Trump’s Russia moves?

A number of GOP lawmakers have broken with the president, mostly over the Oct. 9 diesel deal and the Oct. 16 waiver of the Graham Act, the Russia sanctions law enacted in September. On Oct. 11, Sens. Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Thom Tillis and John Curtis joined Democrats Jeanne Shaheen and Richard Blumenthal in a statement that said the diesel decision “runs directly counter to that law,” the AP reported. CNN counted seven signers, four of them Republicans; the AP listed six.

After the waiver, CBS reported, Tillis called it “Beyond irresponsible,” and Sen. John Cornyn said of the late senator the law is named for, “Lindsey would be appalled.” Sen. Kevin Cramer said: “That’s the problem with taking sort of a business negotiation approach to negotiating with a thug, which is what Vladimir Putin is.”

In the House, Rep. Don Bacon wrote, “The president is prolonging the war, not ending it.” Former Foreign Affairs chairman Michael McCaul said Putin answers American concessions “with contempt for the United States and increased violence against innocent Ukrainians.” Speaker Mike Johnson said “we need to talk” to the White House about the easing of Russian energy sanctions, according to Roll Call. Earlier this year Sen. Roger Wicker, who chairs Armed Services, said, “Easing sanctions on Russia would only prolong its unprovoked, illegal assault.”

Lawmaker Party, state Position on the October Russia moves
Thom Tillis R, North Carolina Called the waiver “Beyond irresponsible”
John Cornyn R, Texas Said Graham “would be appalled”
Don Bacon R, Nebraska Co-sponsors two House bills to undo the easing
Thomas Massie R, Kentucky Welcomed the Graham Act waiver
Mike Johnson R, Louisiana Said “we need to talk” to the White House
Chuck Schumer D, New York Called it a “deal with the devil”
Gregory Meeks D, New York Filed a bill to nullify the diesel licenses
Jeanne Shaheen D, New Hampshire Led an Oct. 24 records-preservation letter, per Axios

Who has defended the administration’s approach?

The White House argues that easing pressure now helps the talks, and at least one Republican has welcomed the waiver. Spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in a statement, reported by ABC News, that enforcing the Graham Act’s sanctions “now would impede ongoing U.S. efforts to negotiate a durable and comprehensive peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia.”

Trump wrote on Truth Social that he did not “want to do anything that will drive, foolishly, Russia away from the bargaining table.” On Oct. 24 he said, “Certainly, we’ll do business with Ukraine and with Russia after this war ends, I would think.” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the administration is acting within its “legal authorities and political mandate,” per CNN.

Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, one of seven House Republicans who voted against the Graham bill, said he was glad Trump had used his authority to waive most of “this stupid law” as it applies to Russia.

What have Democrats said?

Democratic leaders have cast the moves as a boost for Moscow. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said, “By giving the Russian economy life support, Trump’s deal with the devil keeps getting dirtier.” Sen. Elizabeth Warren said Trump is “thumbing his nose” at Congress. These are political characterizations. The administration says its steps are lawful and meant to support the peace talks.

Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on House Foreign Affairs, said in a statement carried by the AP: “At a time when the United States should be increasing pressure on the Kremlin, Donald Trump is cozying up to Putin and striking self-enriching deals instead of standing with Ukraine.” Those are Meeks’s words; no court or agency has made such a finding. The White House position, in Rogers’s statement, is that enforcing the Graham Act’s sanctions now would get in the way of negotiations.

Senate Democrats have also pressed a legal point. A May letter from Sen. Michael Bennet, signed with 14 other senators, said an oil license “flies in the face of a requirement” in CAATSA “to notify Congress 30 days before taking such an action.” Bessent has said the administration has stayed within its legal powers.

What bills on Russia sanctions are pending in Congress?

Several, and none has had a floor vote. A bill Meeks filed on Oct. 16, which he titled the Prohibit Corrupt Russia Oil Deals Act, would nullify Treasury’s general licenses for Russian fuel; the Kyiv Independent reported 17 House co-sponsors, “all Democrats, with the exception of Republican Rep. Don Bacon.”

📨 Get Free Accountability Coverage Alerts

Free · No spam · Unsubscribe anytime

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, a Pennsylvania Republican, filed a separate bill with Bacon and Democrat Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, Roll Call reported, and has said he will try a discharge petition, which needs at least 218 signatures to force a vote. The bipartisan NOPE Act would widen congressional review of Russia sanctions relief.

Bloomberg reported that passing a blocking bill “would likely require overcoming a Trump veto” and that GOP leaders “have not signed on to an effort to rein in the president.”

Congress Russia deals midterms: what could change after Nov. 3?

Control of the committees is the main lever at stake. “The majority party controls committees, giving them the power to hold hearings, issue subpoenas, and launch investigations,” the Christian Science Monitor noted. Republicans hold both chambers today.

Democrats have said what they would do with that power. Meeks told the AP in September that his committee plans to investigate Trump’s international dealings. Axios, as relayed by The Gaze, reported that probing the diesel deal “will be one of the Democrats’ priorities if they secure a majority in at least one chamber.” An Oct. 24 letter led by Shaheen and signed by Warren, Chris Coons, Ron Wyden, Sheldon Whitehouse, Meeks and Republican Tillis asked six large banks and four port authorities to preserve records tied to the deal, per the same report. A preservation request asks recipients to keep documents; it is not a finding of wrongdoing.

Winning a majority would not settle policy by itself. The Monitor pointed out that most Senate bills still need 60 votes and that a veto requires two-thirds of both chambers to override.

What do polls show heading into the vote?

A recent national poll favored Democrats, though it did not ask about the FT-reported deals. A Reuters/Ipsos poll found 31% of Americans approve of Trump’s performance, and registered voters favored Democrats 47% to 35% on the congressional ballot, the Kyiv Independent reported. Bloomberg wrote that fuel costs “have become a major headwind for Republicans heading into the elections.”

One tanker carrying Russian diesel, the Agioi Fanendes, sailed from the Baltic port of Primorsk on Oct. 23; ship trackers cited by the Kyiv Post expected it in the US on Nov. 7, four days after the vote.

Related: What CAATSA section 216 lets Congress block · GOP senators who broke with Trump on diesel · Diesel prices and the midterms

Frequently Asked Questions

Have members of Congress responded to the FT report on US-Russia business deals?

As of October 28, no lawmaker statement aimed at the October 27 FT report itself had been reported. The comments on record concern the Russian diesel deal, the Graham Act waiver and Russia sanctions policy more broadly.

Which Republicans have criticized Trump on Russia sanctions?

Senators Thom Tillis, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski and John Curtis signed an Oct. 11 statement against the diesel plan, and John Cornyn and Kevin Cramer criticized the Graham Act waiver, according to AP and CBS. In the House, Don Bacon, Brian Fitzpatrick and Michael McCaul have objected.

Can Congress stop the Russian diesel deal before the midterms?

Not quickly. The AP reported that both chambers are on recess until after Election Day, and Bloomberg said a blocking bill would likely need to overcome a veto.

What could change for oversight of Russia policy after Nov. 3?

The party that wins a chamber controls its committees, hearings and subpoenas. Axios, as relayed by The Gaze, reported that Democrats would make investigating the diesel deal a priority if they win either chamber. Legislation would still face a 60-vote Senate threshold for most bills and a possible veto.

Sources

This article is news reporting and analysis based on the public sources listed above, as they stood on the dates shown. Where officials, lawmakers or analysts disagree, including on whether an action is lawful, their positions are attributed to them; Donald Trump Class Action is not a court and nothing here is legal advice. Facts in a developing story can change.

Owed money from a settlement? Check what is open at OpenClassActions.com. Caring for someone with dementia? Find practical guides at HelpDementia.com. Working out a skin routine? Evidence-based answers at AcneAdvocate.com. Forgot the name of a movie? Identify it at FindThisMovie.com. Was your data exposed? Track active breaches at DataBreachRadar.com.
⚠️ OPINION & EDITORIAL CONTENT: All articles, commentary, and analysis on donaldtrumpclassaction.com represent the personal opinions of the authors and are presented for informational and editorial purposes only. This site is not affiliated with Donald Trump, the Trump Organization, or any government agency. Nothing here constitutes legal, financial, or professional advice. Read full disclaimer.

We use essential cookies to make this site work and remember your preferences. We do not use advertising or analytics cookies. Privacy Policy. Cookie Policy.