According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the cost of beef and veal rose nearly 14 percent year-over-year in August

Pam Lewison
Washington Policy Center

Trying to “fix” the cost of beef is anti-agriculture and anti-free market. The president recently suggested the United States would purchase beef from Argentina to flood the American market and drive the cost of U.S. beef down.

This plan is absurd.

The comments came over the weekend while the president was flying from Florida to Washington D.C., according to several  reports. The plan to drive down the cost of American beef prices by purchasing Argentinian beef and dropping it into the American market has sparked outrage since the news broke.

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the cost of beef and veal rose nearly 14 percent year-over-year in August. However, new research indicates the true cost of beef to consumers is not reflected in grocery store prices because it does not account for in-store discounts or weekly sales. 

Additionally, it is worth noting American ranchers are a rare bright spot in the agricultural economy at the moment. Median farm income is forecast to increase from -$1,830 in 2024 to -$1,189 in 2025, thanks to an increase in take-home pay from off-farm income. Farm sector debt is also forecast to increase in 2025 to a total of $591.8 billion, between real estate and non-real estate debt combined.

Beef has maintained its value because the current national herd is the smallest it has been in more than 70 years because of increased demand and continued high prices. The stability of the beef market in recent times has made up for the volatility of the rest of the agricultural sector, where commodity prices are depressed by poor trade relations with our three biggest trade partners – China, Mexico, and Canada – and high yielding harvests, which have created a commodity surplus.

Finally, it is worth noting that beef is not the only protein available on the market. There are cuts of beef and recipes for virtually any budget. However, if beef simply seems out of reach based on per pound price, there are meats like pork and chicken which are readily available for less cost per pound. 

There are no “quick fixes” to the cost of beef because there are no fixes needed. Flooding the U.S. market with lesser priced beef from another country under-cuts American producers and undermines free market principles. The free market espouses minimizing government interference and allowing supply and demand to dictate the cost of goods. The plan proposed by the president is in direct conflict with both the free market and American ranchers. The best plan in this instance is to let the market continue to run its course.

Pam Lewison is the director of the Center for Agriculture at the Washington Policy Center.

---

Also read:

• 
  Letter: Interstate Bridge Replacement $13.6 billion estimate is too low! 
  Bob Ortblad argues the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program’s $13.6 billion cost estimate understates the true expense, citing comparable projects, construction challenges, and engineering assumptions.
• 
  Opinion: ‘The drama and the waste of taxpayer money continues’
  Rep. John Ley outlines his objections to the approved fixed-span I-5 Bridge design, citing cost concerns, engineering standards, funding uncertainty, and opposition to light rail and tolls.
• 
  Opinion: Why vote no on the Battle Ground School District levy?
  Dick Rylander outlines why he believes voters should reject the Battle Ground School District levy, citing costs, enrollment trends, test results, and district spending priorities.
• 
  Letter: The multi-million dollar cash grab in Washington schools
  Yacolt resident Mark Rose argues that rising superintendent salaries conflict with classroom cuts and repeated levy requests in Clark County school districts.
• 
  Opinion: When fast feels slow
  Doug Dahl explains why drivers often misjudge their speed, especially when using cruise control or transitioning from freeway to city streets.