The President and the Beloved Cow – How Trump’s Argentina Deal Betrays America’s Ranchers

This article is the continuation of our investigation “How Trump Is Turning America’s Cattle Ranchers Against Him.” What is happening now confirms every suspicion that has been circulating for months across the prairies of Texas and the pastures of South Dakota: Donald Trump has sacrificed the farmers who carried him – for a short-term political effect and a few cents less at the supermarket. In the midst of a period in which the United States’ cattle herds are at a 70-year low, Trump has decided to quadruple the annual imports of Argentine beef. The White House announced that Argentina would henceforth be allowed to export four times as much meat to the U.S. at lower tariff rates than before. The justification: to reduce meat prices. But the truth is politically – and morally – something else.

Here is our article: “How Trump Is Turning America’s Cattle Ranchers Against Him” – An investigative and distressing report under the link: https://kaizen-blog.org/en/wie-trump-amerikas-rinderzuechter-gegen-sich-aufbringt-eine-investigative-und-bedrueckende-recherche/

“The ranchers are so happy for what I’ve done. I saved them,” said Trump. “I don’t think you’d have any beef in this country if I didn’t do that.” A statement that sounds like sheer mockery in America’s cattle regions.

In Texas, in the Midwest, in the Dakotas – anger is brewing everywhere. Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller, a former Trump ally, called the plan on X “the completely wrong approach.” If you want to lower prices, Miller said, you have to strengthen domestic herds, not import cheap products from countries where foot-and-mouth disease still occurs.

Even conservative agricultural associations are now openly turning against the president. The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association called it a “misguided” and “devastating” step that “undermines the future of American family farms.” Its chairman Colin Woodall declared: “We cannot support the president while he sacrifices American ranchers in order to manipulate prices for short-term gain.”

“Cattle ranchers cannot support President Donald Trump as long as he undermines the future of family farms and livestock producers through the import of Argentine beef. It is essential that the president and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins allow cattle markets to operate without political interference.”

“If the administration truly is an ally of American cattle producers, we urge it to abandon this market manipulation and instead focus on completing the promised New World Screwworm facility in Texas; making additional investments to protect domestic cattle herds from foreign animal diseases such as foot-and-mouth disease (FMD); and addressing regulatory hurdles – such as removing the gray wolf from the endangered species list and combating the scourge of black vultures.”

The Texas & Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association called the initiative “a serious threat” to U.S. cattle herds and warned of the risk of introducing animal diseases from South America. Opposition also came from the Senate. In a closed-door meeting at the Capitol, Republican senators confronted Vice President J.D. Vance with their anger. John Thune of South Dakota said, according to participants: “This is not the way to put America first.” Others put it bluntly: “You just threw the ranchers out and crashed the market.” Even in the staunchly Republican camp, the mood is shifting. Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote: “I have no idea who told our great president that this was a good idea. It’s a punch in the gut for all our ranchers.”

Trump justifies himself by claiming he wants to reduce food prices. But economists call that eyewash. The average U.S. household currently pays $6.32 per pound of ground beef, an increase of 25 percent in three years. Yet this price dynamic also has structural causes: drought, feed costs, high interest rates. Even if Argentina exports more, prices will drop only minimally, according to Kansas State University. “Argentina can’t even produce enough to fill the gap,” says agricultural economist Glynn Tonsor.

That is the central contradiction: Trump has spent years campaigning on “America First” – now he is importing foreign meat to sell the illusion of lower prices. Even the agricultural associations that stood by him despite tariffs and trade wars now speak of a “betrayal of the heartland.” Behind the scenes, the deal is even dirtier. Just days before the announcement, Trump hosted Argentina’s president Javier Milei at the White House – a meeting that quickly led to a $20 billion credit line. Hardly had the ink dried when the approval for Argentine beef was issued. It is a geopolitical trade-off, not an economic breakthrough. And it raises an old question anew: How much patriotism remains when profit rules?

Even in Argentina, people warn of overproduction. “If we export too much, we’ll drive up our own prices,” says cattle rancher Augusto Wallace. But Trump sees Milei as an ideological ally – and another country to pull into his economic orbit. The irony is striking: Trump, who railed for decades against “globalism,” is now flooding the U.S. with cheap imported beef, shattering his “America First” rhetoric like rotten wood. Even ultraconservative Senator Deb Fischer of Nebraska said: “If the goal is to lower beef prices – this is the wrong way.” Economists agree: this policy weakens ranchers without helping consumers in any meaningful way. It undermines domestic production, destabilizes markets – and strengthens a country struggling with its own economic crises.

In Nebraska, I met with a group of family ranchers alarmed by any planned import of foreign beef.

This week, we saw an increase in the price of boxed beef, while the price of live cattle dropped dramatically. Ranchers are watching in real time as their hard work slips away.

Simply put: imports are not the solution to lowering beef prices at the grocery store. We should not forget to keep America First. (October 29, 2025)

But for Trump, that is secondary. What matters is the headline: “Trump Lowers Meat Prices.” For him, it is about the image, not the substance. That he is betraying his own base – farmers, ranchers, laborers – seems not to bother him. In the end stands a president who would rather save Argentina than Texas, who cares more about short-term polls than long-term stability. His decision is not an economic chess move but a political gamble. It shows that his supposed patriotism ends at the border of profit. A Texan rancher put it best: “I love the motto ‘America First.’ But this feels like globalism in disguise.” And perhaps that is the most honest sentence about this administration: it talks about home, but it acts like a corporation.