Fox News89%

STEVE FORBES: Chuck Schumer has a beef with beef, but doesn’t even know how to grill it 77%

By Steve Forbes0%

7/6/2026, 2:00:21 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 34 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination, Politically Right Leaning Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 34.7% saturation with 341 hits. Analysis detected 2,212 faulty-reasoning hits from 982 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 68.7% and a BS Rank of 77% (5,079 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 76.80% of the article peer group.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has never worked a cattle ranch. 
He has never run a meatpacking plant. 
And after America saw his backyard grilling stunt, it is fair to ask whether he knows how to properly grill a cheeseburger. 
Yet as Americans prepare to celebrate the 250th anniversary of our nation’s independence this July 4th  in the heart of summer grilling season  Schumer wants Washington to muscle its way into the U.S. beef industry. 
What could possibly go wrong? 
TRUMP WILL WELCOME FARMERS AND RANCHERS TO WHITE HOUSE DINNER TO CELEBRATE TRADE, TAX WINS 
Plenty. 
Schumer’s so-called "Family Grocer and Farmer Relief Act" is classic Washington liberalism: find a real problem, misdiagnose the cause, prescribe a cure that makes things worse and call it "relief." 
We have seen this in healthcare, energy, housing and education. 
Politicians create or worsen a crisis, blame private enterprise and then use the pain as an excuse to expand government control. 
Beef prices are high. 
Families feel it every time they go to the grocery store. 
But the cause is not a cartoon conspiracy by meatpackers. 
It is basic economics: strong demand and tight supply. 
AMERICANS STILL CRAVE PROTEIN DESPITE RECORD BEEF PRICES AS EXPERT REVEALS THE 'HEALTHIEST BURGER' 
Retail beef demand rose sharply from 2019 to 2025, while America’s cattle herd fell to its lowest level in 75 years. 
According to the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, total U.S. cattle and calves stood at just 86.2 million head as of Jan. 
1, 2026. 
That is down sharply from Jan. 1, 2019, when the inventory stood at 94.8 million head, a drop of roughly 9% in seven years. 
The 2025 calf crop was a record-low 32.9 million head, the second consecutive year a new record low was set. 
That is not price gouging. 
That is supply and demand. 
For years, drought battered major cattle-producing states. 
Ranchers faced soaring feed, energy, land, labor and regulatory costs. 
Inflationary Biden-era policies  backed by Schumer and his allies  made everything more expensive for farmers, processors and consumers alike. 
Now Schumer wants to punish the very supply chain families depend on. 
Cattle are not widgets. 
Congress cannot pass a bill and produce more beef. 
Chickens can be raised for market in weeks. 
Beef cattle take years. 
From the birth of a heifer to the point where her offspring can ultimately enter beef production, the process can take roughly three years. 
That long cycle depends on weather, feed, financing, land, labor, trade policy and confidence that government will not suddenly change the rules midstream. 
No Senate press conference can speed up biology. 
Schumer’s so-called "Family Grocer and Farmer Relief Act" is classic Washington liberalism: find a real problem, misdiagnose the cause, prescribe a cure that makes things worse and call it "relief." 
The facts on meatpacking also demolish the Democratic price-gouging narrative. 
Beef packer margins in 2025 averaged a loss of roughly $138 per head. 
Tyson Foods reported an operating loss of more than $1 billion in its beef division that year. 
These are not the numbers of monopolists pocketing windfall profits. 
They are the numbers of a capital-intensive industry squeezed by the tightest cattle supply in more than three generations. 
But Schumer’s bill ignores all that. 
It also ignores the damage done by years of anti-business policies imposed by the same politicians now pretending to be champions of consumers. 
Instead of lowering costs, reducing regulatory barriers, encouraging investment, expanding processing capacity and keeping trade channels open, Schumer wants Washington to politically restructure the beef industry in the middle of a supply crunch. 
That is economic malpractice. 
Breaking up companies may make for good populist sound bites, but it is rarely clean, quick or cheap. 
In meat processing, forced restructuring would mean duplicated infrastructure, higher financing costs, stalled investment, litigation and uncertainty across the supply chain. 
The likely result: fewer efficiencies, less capacity, more risk and higher prices at the meat counter. 
Wealthy shoppers buying prime cuts from boutique butchers may barely notice. 
Working families buying ground beef for burgers, tacos, meatloaf and weeknight dinners will. 
There is a better way. 
Washington should reduce the cost pressures that made beef more expensive in the first place. 
Ease unnecessary regulatory burdens on farmers, ranchers and processors. 
Lower energy and transportation costs. 
Keep import and export markets open during changing supply cycles. 
Reduce tariff and input-cost pressures that make herd rebuilding slower and more expensive. 
Most of all, let markets work. 
And let us not forget who is pushing this scheme. 
Schumer’s allies include the Sen. 
Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Sen. 
Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., wing of politics  the same crowd that has spent years demonizing beef, lecturing Americans about what they eat, and flirting with Green New Deal ideas that would make food, fuel and electricity more expensive. 
Inflationary Biden-era policies  backed by Schumer and his allies  made everything more expensive for farmers, processors and consumers alike. 
One day they tell us to eat less beef to save the planet. 
The next day they pretend to be shocked that beef is more expensive. 
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION 
America’s beef market will recover, but not if Washington turns a supply problem into a government-control problem. 
Herds can be rebuilt. 
Investment can return. 
Prices can ease. 
But that requires stability, lower costs and confidence  not politicians threatening to remake an entire industry for a campaign talking point. 
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP 
As America marks 250 years of independence, we should remember what made this country prosperous: private enterprise, property rights, limited government and free markets. 
Chuck Schumer may not know how to grill a cheeseburger. 
But he should know enough not to burn down the beef industry. 
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM STEVE FORBES 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.9%Steve Forbes: 4.7%Fox Nation: 4.1%Confirmation Bias5.9%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%Steve Forbes: 2.0%Fox Nation: 3.6%Availability Heuristic4.4%This article: 1.9%Steve Forbes: 0.8%Fox Nation: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic1.9%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 4.9%Steve Forbes: 2.4%Fox Nation: 3.0%Overconfidence Bias4.9%This article: 8.2%Steve Forbes: 4.8%Fox Nation: 11.9%Framing Effect8.2%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.4%Steve Forbes: 3.6%Fox Nation: 0.9%Status Quo Bias5.4%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.3%Steve Forbes: 1.5%Fox Nation: 2.8%Optimism Bias3.3%This article: 6.2%Steve Forbes: 2.0%Fox Nation: 1.7%Pessimism Bias6.2%This article: 12.8%Steve Forbes: 5.7%Fox Nation: 10.8%Negativity Bias12.8%This article: 2.1%Steve Forbes: 0.5%Fox Nation: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias2.1%This article: 6.6%Steve Forbes: 3.3%Fox Nation: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error6.6%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Steve Forbes: 2.6%Fox Nation: 3.2%In-Group Bias6.1%This article: 5.0%Steve Forbes: 3.6%Fox Nation: 1.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias5.0%This article: 2.7%Steve Forbes: 0.7%Fox Nation: 2.9%Halo Effect2.7%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 1.0%Fox Nation: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 1.0%Steve Forbes: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.5%Primacy Effect1.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 9.1%Steve Forbes: 12.0%Fox Nation: 2.5%Ad Hominem9.1%This article: 7.1%Steve Forbes: 8.9%Fox Nation: 0.7%Straw Man7.1%This article: 4.9%Steve Forbes: 1.3%Fox Nation: 5.1%Appeal to Authority4.9%This article: 9.7%Steve Forbes: 5.0%Fox Nation: 1.8%False Dilemma9.7%This article: 3.4%Steve Forbes: 4.0%Fox Nation: 1.1%Slippery Slope3.4%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.4%Steve Forbes: 8.1%Fox Nation: 6.1%Hasty Generalization8.4%This article: 1.0%Steve Forbes: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.6%Red Herring1.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 7.2%Steve Forbes: 6.1%Fox Nation: 7.8%Appeal to Emotion7.2%This article: 1.2%Steve Forbes: 0.4%Fox Nation: 1.3%Begging the Question1.2%This article: 11.3%Steve Forbes: 5.0%Fox Nation: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)11.3%This article: 6.2%Steve Forbes: 3.7%Fox Nation: 0.3%Tu Quoque6.2%This article: 0.6%Steve Forbes: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.6%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.2%Steve Forbes: 1.6%Fox Nation: 2.4%Anecdotal6.2%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.4%Steve Forbes: 0.6%Fox Nation: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.4%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 3.9%Steve Forbes: 1.4%Fox Nation: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy3.9%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 34.7%Steve Forbes: 22.8%Fox Nation: 6.2%Biased Writer Voice34.7%This article: 14.5%Steve Forbes: 4.2%Fox Nation: 1.4%Indoctrination14.5%This article: 0.0%Steve Forbes: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 12.9%Steve Forbes: 24.6%Fox Nation: 3.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias12.9%This article: 3.9%Steve Forbes: 2.1%Fox Nation: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…3.9%

982 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.