Texans Furious Over These Imports

Welcome to Texas road sign with a Texas map

Texas ranchers are learning the hard way that when Washington treats beef like just another inflation headline, the people who live off the land can become collateral damage overnight.

Story Snapshot

Trump’s plan to quadruple low-tariff Argentine beef imports has ignited a rare revolt among Texas cattle producers.
Ranchers, state officials, and industry groups warn the proposal will crush cattle prices just as herds and bank accounts start to recover.
Beef imports from a country with foot-and-mouth disease history raise serious questions about animal health and national food security.
Conservative rural allies now challenge whether short-term price relief for urban shoppers is worth sacrificing family ranches.

Why Texas Ranchers Are Pushing Back So Hard

Texas ranchers are not suddenly becoming Democrats; they are drawing a red line where conservative values of free enterprise and national security collide with a quick political fix. The Trump administration wants to slam the market with cheap Argentine beef to nudge grocery prices down, just as years of drought, high feed costs, and forced herd liquidation finally give U.S. producers a little daylight on their balance sheets. Ranchers see the timing as devastating, not accidental.

Local coverage from Lott, Texas, captures cattlemen who survived record feed bills and sold off breeding stock now being told that, just when the market rewards their sacrifice, Washington may flood the pipeline with South American beef. One rancher warns that investor confidence is already shaken by the mere talk of imports, and conservative common sense says you do not destabilize a fragile recovery to score a short-term headline about cheaper burgers in big-box stores.

The Conservative Case Against Argentine Beef Expansion

Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller, a long-time Trump ally, frames the fight in terms any conservative voter understands: you do not outsource strategic assets when you can strengthen your own. Instead of leaning on Argentine beef, he proposes a five-point plan to grow the U.S. herd, expand grazing access, reverse the agricultural trade deficit, and use tax incentives so American ranchers, not foreign suppliers, meet domestic demand. Miller’s stance underscores that loyalty to a politician ends where loyalty to Texas producers and U.S. sovereignty begins.

The Texas & Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association echoes that message and adds a biosecurity warning. TSCRA urges a pause on expanded imports from a country where foot-and-mouth disease is present, arguing that one mistake at the border could cripple the entire national herd and shut down export markets overnight. From a common-sense, right-of-center perspective, assuming that bureaucrats will flawlessly manage that risk to shave a few cents off ground beef looks less like capitalism and more like gambling with the country’s food system.

Family Ranch Economics Versus Populist Optics

The economic math underneath the anger is blunt. Quadrupling low-tariff beef imports increases total supply, which pushes down cattle prices at the ranch gate. For consumers, the benefit may show up as a modest dip at the meat counter; for producers already nursing thin margins, that dip can be the difference between keeping a multi-generation ranch or selling out to a developer or corporate buyer. Reuters quotes a Southeast Texas rancher saying many will not survive if the plan goes forward after finally seeing profits again.

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, rarely eager to clash with a Republican president, now accuses Trump of “undercutting America’s cattle producers.” That wording matters. NCBA is not arguing against trade in principle; it is arguing that a conservative administration should not use foreign product as a blunt instrument against its own base. When a flagship industry group says it “cannot stand behind the President” on this issue, it signals that populist optics about fighting food inflation are drifting away from real-world rural economics.

Risk, Resentment, And The Future Of Rural Support

TSCRA warns that importing more beef now will undermine the natural herd rebuilding that should stabilize prices over time. Ranchers who might keep heifers and expand cow numbers to meet strong demand instead face a policy headwind telling them that if they invest, Washington may erase the upside with the stroke of a pen. That kind of uncertainty breeds resentment, not loyalty, especially in communities that already feel dismissed by coastal media and urban political priorities.

Texas Farm Bureau voices a more understated but equally conservative view: let the market work.[1] High prices, driven mainly by a smaller U.S. herd, should naturally encourage production and bring the market back into balance without distorting trade or importing additional disease risk. That is basic supply-and-demand logic. When federal power skips that step and chases quick relief by leaning on foreign supply, rural voters notice that the people who campaign on “standing with farmers” are, in practice, siding with supermarket optics over producer survival.