“The Biden Administration Is a Disease” – Anger Erupts as Biden Greenlights Paraguayan Imports

Gabriel RomanNov 14, 2023

Minute Read

In a move that has sparked widespread debate, the Biden administration recently approved the import of fresh beef from Paraguay into the United States. This decision was finalized by the Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). It has drawn both interest and criticism from various groups, including government officials, cattle producers, and consumers nationwide.

USDA Approves Paraguayan Beef Amid Criticism

The Biden administration faced significant criticism after allowing beef imports from Paraguay. The USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service set strict conditions for these imports. They aimed to prevent livestock diseases, notably foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), which could harm the U.S. economy.

Concerns Raised Over USDA’s Reliance on Old Data

The decision by the USDA to permit beef imports from Paraguay was heavily scrutinized by Kent Bacus of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA). He said, “USDA based their decision to allow beef imports from Paraguay on a deeply flawed risk assessment that uses old data from site visits conducted more than nine years ago.” His concerns underscored the potential risk of FMD, a disease that Paraguay has struggled with in the past.

Scrutiny of Paraguay’s Inspection System and FMD Mitigation

There were also concerns about the effectiveness of Paraguay’s inspection system in preventing FMD outbreaks in the U.S. Bacus said, “Paraguay heavily relies on private sector funding for most of its FMD mitigation measures.” He highlighted the potential pitfalls in their system.

American Cattle Producers Feel Side-Lined in Decision

“While winning friends and allies in South America may be part of the long-term interests of U.S. diplomacy, it should not be done on the backs of U.S. cattle producers,” Bacus remarked. He argued that the interests of U.S. cattle producers seemed to be overlooked in favor of diplomatic relations with South American countries. He emphasized the importance of prioritizing American agricultural interests.

Paraguay’s Persistent Efforts to Access U.S. Market

Editorial credit: On The Run Photo / Shutterstock.

Some users also criticized the Paraguayan government’s persistent efforts to gain access to the lucrative U.S. beef market. During a meeting in September, both parties deliberated over the importation process. It appears that this reflects Paraguay’s determination to reinitiate beef trade with the U.S.

Advocacy by the Paraguayan Government and Industry for Beef Imports

In May, the Embassy of Paraguay and the country’s cattle industry associations actively lobbied the USDA to allow beef imports. They argued that this would be mutually beneficial and reassured that Paraguay would adhere to U.S. food safety standards. Their support demonstrated their commitment to maintaining high-quality standards in beef exports.

Paraguayan Embassy’s Assurance of Beef Quality

The Embassy of Paraguay shared their confidence in the success of their beef in the American market. In their communications, they stressed the potential advantages for both Paraguayan and American businesses and consumers. This suggested an increase in premium beef product choices in the U.S. market.

Strong Opposition from U.S. Agricultural Groups

The decision to allow imports of Paraguayan beef met with significant opposition from U.S. agricultural groups, including the NCBA and regional affiliates. Their main concern was the risk of an FMD outbreak, a disease the U.S. has successfully avoided since 1929. They warned that such an outbreak could have catastrophic economic implications.

American Farm Bureau’s Stance Against Import Rule

Editorial credit: JHVEPhoto / Shutterstock.

The American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) strongly opposed the USDA’s decision. They recommended withdrawing the rule until updated and relevant data could confirm that there was no risk of infectious animal diseases affecting the U.S. domestic animal population. “Farm Bureau policy opposes the Department’s decision,” the AFBF stated.

Concerns About the True Origin of Imported Beef

There were also concerns about the actual origin of the beef to be imported from Paraguay. Critics feared this beef could actually come from other South American countries such as Brazil, Bolivia, or Argentina. The U.S. has not conducted comprehensive risk assessments here, which could potentially increase the risk of disease transmission.

USCA’s Critique of the Rule Favoring Foreign Interests

The United States Cattlemen’s Association (USCA) strongly objected to the rule. They argued, “The U.S. shouldn’t line the pockets of overseas investors or Brazilian meatpacking monoliths at the risk of our own cattle and beef industry.” They argued this decision could disproportionately benefit overseas investors and industries at the expense of the U.S.

NCBA’s Concerns About Paraguay’s Benefits Versus U.S. Risks

Bacus also questioned what tangible benefits this arrangement would bring to U.S. consumers. He said, “But where is the benefit for U.S. consumers, and why should the U.S. cattle herd be placed at greater risk of FMD?” This highlights the apparent need for a more balanced approach to trade decisions.

Economic Worries in Response to Beef Import Decision

The decision stirred economic concerns among critics. “Working against farmers and ranchers in the US yet importing food from another country. Destroying our economy and helping a foreign country. What’s wrong with this picture?” one critic pointed out. It seems many see there is potential harm to the U.S. agricultural sector.

Allegations of Hidden Political Agendas

The Biden administration faced allegations of concealed political motives behind allowing Paraguayan beef imports. Critics implied that this decision might be part of a broader, unrelated political strategy. One remark highlighted this suspicion: “That’s Biden’s plan to wipe out Americans,” suggesting a deeper political objective beyond trade considerations.

Questions About Patriotism and Ethical Standards

Critics openly questioned the administration’s allegiance to American values and interests. “Biden along with Soros $$$ are together on a mission to DESTROY America! Biden is NOT a patriot but a traitor who ripped off America with his brother and junkie son Hunter,” a critic said. They cast doubts on the ethical and patriotic credentials of the administration.

Health and Environmental Impact Concerns

Concerns about the health and environmental implications of importing beef from Paraguay were also raised. Critics expressed apprehension about potential disease risks and the environmental consequences of such imports. “The Biden administration is a disease” was a comment that showed these health and environmental anxieties.

Linking Beef Imports to Wider Immigration and Trade Policies

Some users saw the beef import decision as part of a larger immigration and trade strategy by the Biden administration. This perspective linked various policy decisions, suggesting an overarching agenda. “Imports only? He’s been importing new votes for almost 3 years,” one person commented. They believed in a broader political strategy influencing various sectors.

Mixed Public Reactions Reflecting on Policy Decisions

The decision was viewed as a mirror of broader policy trends and priorities. “IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE HE IS GOING TO DO TO TEAR DOWN AMERICA? SO NOW HE IS TRYING TO DESTROY OUR CATTLE INDUSTRY,” a comment read. This reflects a feeling of disbelief and concern about the administration’s broader intentions.