The Dictatorship

Midwest soybean farmers are squeezed further by tariffs and Iran war

Published

2 months ago

April 14, 2026

Midwest soybean farmers are squeezed further by tariffs and Iran war

WAHOO, Neb. (AP) — Strong winds whipped around Doug Bartek, a fifth-generation farmer, as he headed into a grain bin to shovel soybeans onto a conveyor chute. The 60-year-old was anxious at the onset of the spring planting season, rattling off the long list of issues affecting his family’s livelihood at their 2,000-acre farm near Wahoo, Nebraska.

The high cost of fuel, equipment, and fertilizer — compounded by the Iran war — and also tariffs, perceived “price gouging” by suppliers, and low soybean prices driven by a global supply glut. All of it weighs on Bartek, who is chairman of the Nebraska Soybean Association.

“Our biggest struggles are our inputs, be it fertilizer, seed, chemical, parts,” Bartek said. “There has been so much drastic markup in all of these. And I just kind of feel like the farmer’s kind of painted in the corner.”

Soybeans from last year's harvest are loaded into a truck at Doug Bartek's farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel) — Soybeans from last year’s harvest are loaded into a truck at Doug Bartek’s farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Bartek’s concerns are shared by many Midwest soybean producers. Costs, such as equipment, have crept up over time while soybean prices have stayed low. Tariffs levied by the Trump administration last year and the resulting monthslong trade war with China only made things worse, they say. Then the Iran war bottled up shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, restricting global fertilizer supplies and sending fertilizer prices sky high. A ceasefire deal announced April 7 raised hope that bottlenecks in the strait would abate, but the future of the agreement was uncertain.

AP AUDIO: Already under financial pressure, Midwest soybean farmers are squeezed further by tariffs, Iran war

AP correspondent Julie Walker reports already under financial pressure, Midwest soybean farmers are squeezed further by tariffs, Iran war.

“A lot of producers are pretty nervous going into this year,” said Justin Sherlock, a soybean farmer and president of the North Dakota Soybean Growers Association. “It looks like we’re going to have another year of negative returns.”

Years of rising costs, low soybean prices

Soybeans, which are used for livestock feed, food and biofuels, are among the top U.S. agricultural exports. That hasn’t always been the case. Before the 1960s soybeans weren’t a major crop in the U.S, according to Chad Hart, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University. It wasn’t until the 1990s that soybean production accelerated due to international demand — primarily from China — and soybeans and corn are now dominant in U.S. agriculture.

But U.S. soybean farmers, who typically also grow corn, have been facing financial issues for years even before the onset of the Iran war. Soybean prices have been persistently low in recent years. The global market has been awash in soybeans, driven in part by Brazil, which surpassed the U.S. as the world’s largest soybean producer years ago.

“If we look at global soybean production over the past several years, it continues to set record, after record, after record,” Hart said. “There’s been just large supplies globally, and that has led to depressed prices.”

Dalton Bartek works a field to prepare for planting soybeans on his family's farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel) — Dalton Bartek works a field to prepare for planting soybeans on his family’s farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Meanwhile, Midwest soybean farmers’ costs have risen. Overall farm production expenses, including seed and pesticide, have increased over time, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Operating costs for soybean production have stayed elevated since 2020 and are projected to increase again in 2026, according to the agency.

The cost of land also is a major issue for farmers, experts say. Midwest crop land values have increased. And most regional farmers rent some of their land, according to Joana Colussi, research assistant professor in the department of agricultural economics at Purdue University.

Bartek, who rents three-quarters of his land, said landowners are increasing rents, causing further financial strain.

“There’s a lot of what I call absentee landowners that have absolutely no idea what goes on on the farm,” he said. “All they know is their taxes went up and you get to make up the difference, some way, somehow.”

“They’re very concerned about negative margins driven by low prices and high cost,” said Paul Mitchell, a professor of agricultural and applied economics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, of farmers. “There’s just a liquidity cash crunch for a lot of them and they’re just trying to figure out how to deal with everything.”

The number of farms in the U.S. has shrunk over time and consolidation in farming is a long-term trend, though farmers’ financial pressures wrought by high input costs and low commodity prices have contributed, Hart said. Larger farms tend to be more competitive and depend on large, expensive machinery.

“The financial reserves need(ed) on a farm are much greater than they used to be,” Hart said. “We’re a bit more sensitive to the financial conditions these days because so much capital is being utilized within the farm business.”

Tariffs, trade war have lasting impacts

Market forces aren’t the only issue weighing on farmers. Sweeping tariffs levied by President Donald Trump in April 2025 exacerbated a trade war with China, the top buyer of U.S. soybeans. China responded with retaliatory tariffs and effectively boycotted U.S. soybeans, cutting off a major export market for Midwest farmers and driving the price of soybeans even lower.

“When that was announced and soybean prices basically collapsed, if you could afford to hold on to your beans and wait for better times, you were OK,” said Mike Cerny, a soybean, and winter wheat corn farmer in Sharon, Wisconsin. “If you had a mortgage due or payments due or cash flow needs and you had to sell at that point, you were taking it pretty rough.”

Doug Bartek shovels soybeans in a bin on his farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

The U.S. and China eventually reached a deal in late 2025. Beijing committed to buying 12 million metric tons of soybeans by January and at least 25 million metric tons annually for the next three years. China has since met its initial soybean purchase goal and the Trump administration also rolled out a $12 billion temporary aid package in December to boost farmers affected by the trade war.

But the damage is already done, experts and farmers say. While China’s renewed purchases and the federal payments are helping, it’s not enough to recover farmers’ losses. Even after federal assistance, farmers still lost almost $75 per harvested acre of soybeans in the 2025 crop, according to the American Soybean Association. And the trade war further pushed China toward competing soybean e xporters, such as Brazil — accelerating a trend of declining U.S. soybean exports to China.

“When China decided to stop purchasing, we couldn’t find enough other markets to replace those sales,” Hart said. “We’re still feeling the impacts today. When you look at where soybean exports are today versus where we would normally expect them to be, we’re still running anywhere from 15% to 20% behind normal.”

Joseph Glauber, former chief economist at the Department of Agriculture between 2008 and 2014, said global competitors to U.S. soybean farmers gained from the trade war.

“When China has put on tariffs against the U.S. they’ve tended to buy then from Brazil or Argentina, largely Brazil,” Glauber added. “We’re not nearly as dominant in the world as we used to be in terms of the global export market for soybeans.”

Iran war drove up fuel, fertilizer costs

After the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28, a severe slowdown in shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz sent the price of oil soaring. The shipping disruption also largely stopped the export of nitrogen fertilizers manufactured in the Persian Gulf and limited access to key fertilizer ingredients. The price of urea, the most widely traded nitrogen fertilizer, skyrocketed.

Soybeans don’t require nitrogen fertilizer, but it’s vital for corn and most soybean farmers also grow corn. About half the global supply of urea comes from the Middle East, and Qatar and Saudi Arabia are two of the top sources of U.S. fertilizer imports, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation.

The U.S. and Iran agreed to a two-week ceasefire last week that included reopening the strait of Hormuz, but traffic remained slowed amid disagreements over Israeli attacks in Lebanon, and the price of urea remains elevated.

Many Midwest farmers bought their fertilizer well in advance of the spring planting season. But some farmers who didn’t buy early face elevated prices. Dave Walton, a corn, soybean, and hay farmer in Iowa and vice president of the American Soybean Association, said in March that some of his neighbors didn’t have cash on hand last fall to buy fertilizer and were struggling to budget for fertilizer due to high prices.

Doug Bartek transfers soybeans from a storage bin to a truck on his farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

The war also caused gasoline and diesel prices to surgecausing further headaches for farmers. Oil prices dropped following the ceasefire announcement, but the war and the closure of the strait will have lasting impacts on farmers, said Seth Goldstein, a senior equity analyst at Morningstar, an investment research company. Facilities in the Middle East that are critical for exporting chemicals, oil and other commodities were damaged or destroyed during the war and it will take time for supply chains to recover, he said.

“Facilities have been hit, like liquid natural gas plants,” Goldstein added. “You are also looking at a big supply crunch in commodity chemicals, which are the inputs for crop chemicals.”

“We burn a lot of diesel fuel,” said Chris Gould, a corn and soybean farmer in Maple Park, Illinois. “It’s hard to say if I’m gonna come out ahead or behind on this whole deal. But I suspect I’m gonna come out behind.”

Concerns about the future

Farmers’ financial problems are showing up in some measures. Farm bankruptcies, while still relatively low, continued to climb in 2025, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation. In a survey of 400 farmers conducted by researchers at the Purdue Center for Commercial Agriculture in late March, almost half said their farm operation is financially worse off than it was a year ago.

Goldstein, the Morningstar analyst, said farmers’ high costs and low revenues contributed to the spike in bankruptcies between 2024 and 2025. If costs rise faster than crop prices going forward, he added, that “would strain farmers again and likely lead to more bankruptcies.”

Doug Bartek talks about high production costs and tough market conditions for the soybeans he grows on his farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

After 43 years of farming, Bartek said the smell of fresh dirt still gets him excited for spring planting. But he’s also heard of farmer suicides, bankruptcies and “retirement sales” where farmers are forced to auction off their operations due to financial problems. Bartek compares farmers to gamblers who put “millions of dollars in the dirt” hoping for returns.

At times, Bartek doubts his own decision to go into farming. He’s also worried about his son, who purchased a farm a few years ago.

Bartek wonders: “Did I do the right thing helping him get into farming?”

___

Kelety reported from Phoenix.

___

This story is a collaboration between Lee Enterprises and The Associated Press.

The Dictatorship

The clock is ticking on an Iran talks. Here’s what still has to get done.

Published

1 hour ago

June 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The clock is ticking on an Iran talks. Here’s what still has to get done.

As talks loom between the U.S. and Iran, negotiators face a simple and daunting task: turning a 14-point memorandum of understanding into a comprehensive nuclear deal within 60 days.

The ticking clock was set in motion on Thursday, according to Vice President JD Vance, following the signing of the MOU one day earlier. That signing brought an official end to military hostilities. What it did not do is resolve the conflict that caused them.

Some agreements took effect immediately upon signing: a cessation of hostilities, the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, the lifting of the U.S. naval blockade, the issuing of oil waivers and initial steps to unfreeze billions of dollars in Iranian assets.

But those were the easy parts.

What remains are the metaphorical landmines — the unresolved questions the MOU largely deferred rather than decided, each with the potential to blow up any prospect for a nuclear deal. On Thursday evening, the White House announced that Vice President JD Vance will not attend talks in Switzerland that had been planned for Friday — a decision that may well be read as a signal of just how far apart the two sides are. A White House spokesperson acknowledged in a statement that while the U.S. delegation has been prepared to depart at the first available opportunity, “the logistics of these negotiations have never been simple or predictable.”

Here is what the negotiators will actually have to solve:

The future of the Strait of Hormuz

The MOU ensures safe passage of commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz “with no charge for 60 days only,” and outsources the negotiating responsibility for ensuring long-term toll-free passage to Gulf allies — ceding responsibility for a key outstanding issue.

“We don’t ever want this to happen again — that’s not about tolling, that’s about ensuring that the Straits are never used as a choke point for the global economy ever again,” Vance said at the White House on Thursday. “If that’s not reflected in the final deal, there’s not going to be a final deal.”

Recognizing the Iranians will “assert their rights as aggressively as they can,” a senior U.S. official was confident Gulf states would preserve their own self-interests and press Iran to allow toll-free passage.

There’s also the matter of demining the waterway. Iran has 30 days for “removing the technical and military obstacles and demining,” but mine removal could take weeks or even months — potentially testing U.S. patience if ship traffic doesn’t recover quickly.

In a joint statement following this week’s G7 summit in France, leaders said a defensive initiative led by France and the UK could help by “protecting merchant vessels, reassuring commercial shipping operators, and supporting verification that all mines are removed.”

Sanctions and frozen assets

Senior U.S. officials have said sanctions relief for Iran would be tied to its performance — but haven’t yet indicated what those benchmarks will be.

“As they dial up their good behavior, we can dial up the economic relief,” Vance said in broad terms on Thursday at the White House. “If they dial down their good behavior, we can turn it off.”

The MOU commits the U.S. to ending all Iranian sanctions — including those imposed by the U.N. Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency — “in an agreed-upon schedule as part of the final deal.” How quickly the U.S. is willing to provide this economic relief could become a sticking point.

Complicating matters further: whether lifting of sanctions would require congressional action, and how the State Department’s designation of Iran as a State Sponsor of Terrorism factors in.

Then there’s the unfreezing of billions of dollars of Iranian assets. Though the Trump administration insists any release would be tied to Iran’s performance, the MOU’s own text undercuts that: Paragraph 13 says the process of releasing assets must begin before negotiations even start, handing Iran an upfront incentive rather than one to earn.

“It’s clearly a huge loophole and a potential for disagreement,” said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East advisor and negotiator for the State Department, calling the text’s language “destructive ambiguity.”

The Lebanon front

The MOU calls for “the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon.”

“We expect Hezbollah is not going to be firing rockets and firing drones at the Israelis, and we also expect that the Israelis are not going to be going wild in Lebanon, right? Both sides have to honor their end of the deal,” Vance said at the White House on Thursday.

Yet Israel did not sign the aforementioned “deal.”

Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter said it’s “unnecessary” for Lebanon to have been included in an agreement between the U.S. and Iran, pouring cold water on the idea that Israel would cease its offensive against Hezbollah and occupation of southern Lebanon — even if Iran says that’s a dealbreaker for negotiations.

“This is something that we simply can’t live with,” Leiter told NPR on Tuesday. “We can’t have jihadi terrorists on our border. … We’re not going to withdraw from South Lebanon, and the mad men of Tehran have no business poking their nose into Lebanon.”

A U.S. official confirmed that U.S.-brokered peace talks between Israel and Lebanon will continue as planned next week at the State Department. Whether the Lebanon provision holds will depend on Iran keeping Hezbollah in check and Trump keeping Netanyahu in line.

Iran’s reconstruction

The MOU promises that within 60 days, the U.S. would work “with regional partners” to develop a plan guaranteeing at least $300 billion for Iran’s “reconstruction and economic development.”

Trump has insisted that there “is no 300 Billion Dollar payment to Iran by the U.S.” using taxpayer money. That may technically be true, but the U.S. has still committed to delivering that sum in the form of investment. That means convincing private corporations and Gulf allies — many of which are dealing with economic disruption and rebuilding costs after facing strikes from Iran — to invest in a country the Trump administration is still threatening to attack again if Iran reneges on its end of the deal.

Vance said there is a “great desire from the Arab world and from outside the Arab world to actually get involved in Iran if they behave properly.” Pressed by MS NOW whether private money would be included, Vance said he assumes countries like the United Arab Emirates would be part of the picture.

But Gulf leaders expressed concern to MS NOW about the agreement’s financial provisions that could strengthen Iran economically at a time when many Gulf states believe pressure should have been maintained.

Iran’s highly enriched uranium and nuclear program

For the duration of negotiations, Iran will “maintain the current status quo of its nuclear program,” per the MOU. What happens after that is the central outstanding question — the one that led to war in the first place.

The MOU provides no consensus on what to do with Iran’s existing stockpile of enriched uranium, only an agreement to “resolve” the matter. It doesn’t distinguish between the roughly 900 pounds of highly enriched uranium — material close to bomb-grade — and the 11 tons enriched to various levels above the 3.67% threshold set by the JCPOA, which Trump withdrew from during his first term.

A senior U.S. official said downblending the stockpile would be the minimum standard, with Washington pushing for “more than that” during negotiations. Vance alluded to “gentlemen’s agreements,” noting that Iran has “promised that they would allow inspectors in to destroy that highly enriched stockpile, and then, of course, it’s not usable anymore, you take it somewhere else.” Iran has not formally agreed to anything beyond a general promise to resolve the issue.

Whether Iran will be permitted to enrich in the future, and to what extent, remains an open question. The MOU commits the two countries to discussing “the issue of enrichment and other mutually agreed matters,” promising a “satisfactory framework” related to Iran’s “nuclear needs” in a final deal.

Notably, the U.S. has already backed down from one of its previous red lines, dropping Trump’s earlier demand for zero enrichment forever in favor of allowing Iran to maintain a civilian nuclear program.

“We’re not bothered at all by the idea of civilian power plants in Iran,” a senior U.S. official said. “What we’re bothered by is the type of infrastructure that would allow them to jump from civilian power generation to nuclear weapons development. … We feel quite confident that if they meet their obligations under this agreement, they’re not going to have that infrastructure to build a nuclear weapon.”

A senior administration official insisted Iran has committed to dismantling its nuclear weapons program, including its nuclear site, noting that the countries would “figure out how to do that in the technical negotiations that will follow.” But abandoning its nuclear program will be a tough domestic sell for the Islamic Republic to make.

Inspections and implementation

Trump has repeatedly hammered the Obama-era JCPOA for not having a strong enough verification and inspections system. But his own MOU offers little clarity on what will replace it, only a vague commitment that “an executive mechanism will be established to monitor the successful implementation of this MOU and the future compliance of the final deal.”

Given that Iran blocked IAEA inspectors from accessing its nuclear facilities under the JCPOA, a stronger inspection system represents perhaps the most important potential U.S. win in final deal talks — if Washington can secure one.

“If we feel comfortable with the inspection and enforcement regime, that is when they will get some of the benefits of negotiation,” a senior administration official told reporters last week, without providing specifics of what that verification regime would entail nor confirming the role of the UN or IAEA.

Miller, the former State Department negotiator, compared the MOU to Trump’s 20-point Gaza plan — a document that pushed the conflict out of the headlines but left unsolved problems on the humanitarian, disarmament and reconstruction fronts.

“I see very little chance, without significant flexibility on the part of both sides, that 60 days is going to be enough” to bridge the “Grand Canyon-like gaps that separate Tehran and Washington,” Miller said.

And though the MOU’s 60-day deadline allows for extension “with mutual consent,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the military is “prepared to restart if we need to” if Iran does not show progress in complying with U.S. demands.

Trump, speaking at the G7, was blunter still.

“If it doesn’t get done in 60 days, that’s all right,” Trump said. “We go back to bombing.”

The Dictatorship

New York mayor, other leaders push to ban horse-drawn carriage rides after Indian teen’s death

Published

1 hour ago

June 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

New York mayor, other leaders push to ban horse-drawn carriage rides after Indian teen’s death

Jun. 19, 2026, 3:15 AM EDT

NEW YORK (AP) — The death of a young tourist who jumped from a runaway horse carriagein Central Park has intensified calls to ban the old-time attraction from one of New York City’s most recognizable destinations.

Romanch Mahajan, 18, died after he got off of the four-wheeled carriage as its horse sprinted through the parkwithout the driver.

He is believed to be the first person to die in a horse carriage accident since they were introduced in Central Park more than 150 years ago, according to the labor union representing the industry and the Central Park Conservancy, which manages the 843-acre (341-hectare) park.

The conservancy was among those arguing Thursday that the carriage industry should be suspended until more protections can be put in place. Mahajan’s death was the eighth horse-related incident in the park over the past 13 months, the group said.

“The record is undeniable: crashes, runaways, horse deaths, injuries, and now a devastating loss of human life,” said Edita Birnkrant, head of the animal welfare group New Yorkers for Clean, Livable, and Safe Streets.

Animal rights activists have long said the carriage horses are overworked, can get easily spooked on city streets and live in inadequate stables while their drivers regularly flout city rules. All of those allegations have been denied by the horse and carriage owners, who say the animals are well cared for and the stables are fine.

The conservancy has argued that horses can no longer safely share park roads teeming with joggers, cyclists, pedestrians and motorized scooters, noting that other U.S. cities, including Chicago and San Antonio, have also recently done away with the nostalgic rides.

But carriage industry leaders said the fatal crash underscores the need for better protections, not outright elimination of the quaint attraction that harkens back to a romanticized, bygone New York.

“We’re absolutely gutted and stunned by this tragedy,” said Alexander Kemp, a vice president with the Transport Workers Union Local 100, the labor union representing carriage drivers and owners. “We have shuttered the stables and ceased operations today while we have extensive internal discussions of safety protocols and how they can be improved.”

Horse carriages weren’t running Thursday and it was not immediately clear when the rides, which cost about $72 for the first 20 minutes, would resume.

The owner of the carriage involved in the fatal crash also suspended the driver indefinitely, and has plans to retire the horse from the business, according to the union. It said the driver improperly dismounted to take a photograph of his passengers.

Celebrating a high school graduation turned tragic

Mahajan had been on a family trip celebrating his recent high school graduation when the family decided to take a ride on one of the park’s often photographed, richly decorated carriages.

His father, Deepak Mahajan, toldThe New York Times the family had arrived from India on Monday, the same day Romanch learned he had been accepted to a university in Jaipur.

They had spent the trip visiting many of the city’s popular tourist attractions, including the Statue of Liberty and the Brooklyn Bridge.

The carriage driver hopped off to take a photograph of the family near a fountain when the horse suddenly bolted, Mahajan said.

Romanch’s mother fell out of the carriage, and the teen jumped out in an attempt to save her, according to his father.

“He was screaming, ‘Mom!’” Deepak Mahajan recounted to the Times.

But Romanch hit his head on the ground before the carriage clipped another horse-drawn vehicle and eventually toppled over. The father, his wife and younger son escaped with minor injuries.

“This incident should be taken very seriously,” Mahajan said. “It took my son’s dream away.”

Carriage owners and drivers fear end to livelihood

New York City leaders vowed to work swiftly to end the industry in the wake of Romanch’s death.

City Council Speaker Julie Menin said the legislative body would hold a hearing next month on a long-simmering bill that would ban horse carriages and help drivers transition into new jobs.

Last year, the park conservancy revived debateover the carriages when, for the first time, it threw its support behind what’s known as Ryder’s Law.

“The time to act is now,” she wrote on the social platform X.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani also reiterated his support for ending the industry, saying he’d work with the council, the industry and animal welfare advocates to “deliver a just transition that protects workers while ending horse-drawn carriages in Central Park once and for all.”

Other recent mayors have made similar pronouncements. Mayor Bill de Blasio vowed to shut downthe industry “on Day One” in office, only to come up against years of council opposition. Mayor Eric Adams, Mamdani’s predecessor, came out against the industry near the endof his single term.

Onur Altintas, who owns four horses and a carriage operating in Central Park, was among those worried about an end to their livelihood. He said the industry provides hundreds of jobs to drivers, stable hands, farriers, and others in horse-related trades.

“We are sad about what happened. Nobody wants that. But it’s not like this is happening every day,” said Altintas. “Car crashes and plane crashes are happening every single day. One horse makes an accident, and the world is destroyed? Come on.”

The longtime owner and driver said the industry needs better regulations to make it safer. He said “90%” of horse-related accidents could be avoided simply by installing hitching posts throughout the park so drivers could safely tether and secure their horses, including at popular tourist photo stops.

The Transport Workers Union on Thursday said legislation recently introducedinto the council would do just that.

“Drivers can’t leave their carriage. They have to be on it all the time,” Altintas said. “But it’s impossible. We have to go to the restroom. We have to eat. We have to do things.”

The Dictatorship

Sen. Duckworth urges FAA to reject pressure to approve Trump’s triumphal arch

Published

1 hour ago

June 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Sen. Duckworth urges FAA to reject pressure to approve Trump’s triumphal arch

Jun. 18, 2026, 8:31 PM EDT

Sen. Tammy Duckworth sent a letter Thursday urging the head of the Federal Aviation Administration to resist any pressure from President Donald Trump to prioritize construction of his planned triumphal arch over aviation safety.

The letter from the Illinois senator, the top Democrat on the Senate’s aviation subcommittee, adds to questions and concerns over Trump’s proposed 250-foot (76-meter) arch for the nation’s capital. Pushed by Trump to commemorate the country’s 250th anniversary, it would be more than twice as tall as the Lincoln Memorial.

Duckworth wrote that the FAA’s initial review of the arch appears to have been expedited and raised questions about whether the president or his White House aides are “already improperly pressuring FAA to prioritize rubberstamping Trump’s vanity arch over public safety.”

Officials are looking to complete the towering edifice within three years, possibly requiring 20 hours of work per day and cranes up to 320 feet (106 meters) tall, according to a National Park Service preliminary report, which Duckworth cited in her letter to FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford.

The agency said it would respond directly to Duckworth.

The arch’s close proximity to the complex airspace of Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, where a U.S. Army helicopter collided with a commercial jet last year, killing 67 people, was a key concern for Duckworth.

The crash “underscores the consequences of inadequate coordination and the need for extreme caution when evaluating any new obstruction in this environment,” she wrote. The FAA must be “firm in rejecting any improper or irresponsible pressure” from Trump on the matter.

In a previous statement, the FAA said that a preliminary feasibility study found “no adverse impacts to operations” at the nearby airport. The top of the structure, however, would need to be lit with red obstruction lights, which it called “a common safety tool.”

The agency said a full study in coordination with the park service would come next.

Duckworth added another concern in her letter, that the arch would interrupt the historic sightline between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery, and thereby “offensively desecrate the hallowed symbolism.”