Trump wants to suspend the federal gas tax as prices soar amid war with Iran ⁠54%

By Danielle Kurtzleben⁠55%

5/11/2026, 5:27:26 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Appeal to Authority, and Confirmation Bias, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 29% saturation with 80 hits. Analysis detected 591 faulty-reasoning hits from 276 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 52.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠54% (10,084 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 53.90% of the article peer group.

President Trump says he wants the gas tax to be temporarily suspended as the war in Iran extends into its 11th week and keeps oil prices elevated. 
He told CBS News Monday morning he wants the tax suspended "for a period of time" and would want it reintroduced "when gas goes down." 
Asked by reporters in the Oval Office later in the day how long the gas tax would be suspended, the president responded, "'Til it's appropriate." 
Suspending the gas tax would require an act of Congress. 
Currently, the tax is 18.4 cents per gallon of gas and 24.4 cents per gallon of diesel. 
Regular gasoline cost just under $3 per gallon on average before the U.S. bombed Iran. 
Now, the average cost per gallon has soared by more than 50 percent to $4.52, according to AAA. 
Blockades imposed during the Iran war have stalled the passage of oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, causing gas prices to spike. 
Around one-fifth of the world's crude oil usually travels through that strait. 
The potential suspension of the gas tax is a tacit acknowledgment from the White House of the toll that high gas prices have taken on American consumers. 
Eight in ten Americans say gas prices are straining their budgets, including overwhelming majorities of Democrats, independents, and Republicans alike, according to the latest NPR/PBS News/Marist poll. 
In addition, 63 percent of Americans say they blame Trump "a great deal" or "a good amount" for those higher gas prices. 
That includes more than 6 in 10 independents and nearly one-third of Republicans. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 18.1%Danielle Kurtzleben: 4.4%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias18.1%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.8%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Danielle Kurtzleben: 2.0%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic6.5%This article: 14.1%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.1%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic14.1%This article: 5.4%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.5%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias5.4%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 5.6%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 15.2%Danielle Kurtzleben: 9.9%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect15.2%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.1%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 3.6%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.6%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias3.6%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 4.4%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.3%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 9.8%Danielle Kurtzleben: 11.7%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias9.8%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 4.6%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 8.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 3.3%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error8.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.6%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.9%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.1%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.4%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 13.4%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.5%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias13.4%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.1%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 9.1%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.2%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias9.1%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.6%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.0%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 20.7%Danielle Kurtzleben: 3.5%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority20.7%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.5%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.1%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.3%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 3.1%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.6%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 14.5%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.5%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon14.5%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 3.7%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.0%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 29.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 3.4%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)29.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.6%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.3%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.8%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.3%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 27.9%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.1%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)27.9%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.4%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.5%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.6%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 9.1%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.8%KUOW: 1.0%Unattributed Quote9.1%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 1.3%KUOW: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 9.8%Danielle Kurtzleben: 7.6%KUOW: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice9.8%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.5%KUOW: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.4%KUOW: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Danielle Kurtzleben: 0.0%KUOW: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

276 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker28%attributed speech199writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coveragePresident Trump • 27 words • 0.0% coveragePresident Trump • 25 words • 100.0% coveragePresident Trump • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

President Trump

100%flagged-word coverage
77 attributed words100% of attributed speech91% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Unattributed Quote+32.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%President Trump: 32.5%32.5%Biased Writer Voice-13.6 ptsWriter: 13.6%President Trump: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.