In the last few essays, I've stressed a personal spin on a topic; for example, Trump's war with Pope Leo touched on the Catholic Church, an integral part of my Franco-American heritage. My transition to a libertarian perspective largely emerged during the Tea Party rebellion (which had zero to do with Trump but was a separate response to Obama's leftism). Three political figures emerged during this period, parallel to Ron Paul's 2008/2012 POTUS campaigns: Justin Amash, Rand Paul, dnd Tom Massie. (Paul is a senator, and the others Congressmen.) I wasn't one of their constituents. (Note: Amash is no longer in Congress, an early Trump target, and I have strong differences with the others on issues like immigration, COVID, and/or the SAVE Act.)
In this case, I have the context of my second sister's marriage. (I have 6 younger siblings, including 4 sisters.) My sister's husband's father retired to an East Texas ranch that included a few cattle (raised for slaughter). I remember visiting them in married students' housing at ETSU, now an affiliate of the Texas A&M system. I remember that E prepared a roast, which she referred to as from "Blue Eyes", one of her father-in-law's herd, my first experience with grass-fed beef (It is a bit of an acquired taste and arguably more nutritious, with a more balanced ratio of Omega-3 fats and leaner than conventionally finished beef. There are some nuances to preparation vs. more marbled, conventionally finished meat.) Via Google AI:
I really didn't eat much grass-fed beef over the following 2 decades, but began buying it more during my early low-carb diet days starting around 2003, when my weight reached an all-time high. In reality, USDA inspections are necessary for interstate beef shipments (some state-inspected programs have standards or screening comparable to USDA). I had to go out of the way to procure expensive, locally butchered beef bundles at refrigerated trucks or rural addresses with big freezers. Or you could buy, like, a quarter of a livestock animal for butchering. There were a few Internet storefronts; I also began to see some limited grass-fed hamburger or lamb at supermarkets or warehouse clubs, often imported from Australia or New Zealand. I remember I couldn't find options in Arizona, so I subscribed to ButcherBox for a monthly box.
That provides a context for where Massie became relevant. My BIL (re: "Blue Eyes") had gone on to a middle-management IT role in the telecommunications industry and eventually tired of the corporate lifestyle. He moved on or near his dad's ranch. It looked like he was starting up a grass-fed beef storefront. My sister was setting up a cooking tips/recipe section of the website. But the business model abruptly changed; everything grass-fed disappeared from the website, and he seemed to shift his business plan to selling premium conventionally finished beef, say, for catering corporate special events. I was never told exactly what happened, but I believe it had to do with smaller ranchers finding it tough to get USDA inspections. a prerequisite for interstate sales. [I was skeptical about his new business model, that beef producers wouldn't in-source sales and didn't really want to pay a premium for conventionally finished beef with less favorable Omega-3 profiles. My sister said while they didn't lose money in the business, they didn't clear a sustainable profit.]
This is a long introduction for a relevant legislative priority of Massie, who raises some livestock for slaughter on his Kentucky farm.
This, of course, reflects a perspective that Big Business uses regulation to impair the competition of smaller competitors lacking relevant economies of scale. A classic example is, say, Walmart supporting raising minimum wages. We see this in other contexts as well, say, charitable "feed the poor" operations challenged by eateries exaggerating the health risks of food exempted from labeling. salt content or other regulations, they argue, constitute unfair competition. USDA inspections stemmed if you recall from sensationalized accounts like Sinclair's
The Jungle.
So, naturally, Massie's PRIME Act, attracted predictable
opposition from Big Meat producers:
Current law exempts the custom slaughter of animals from federal inspection regulations, but only if the meat is slaughtered for personal, household, guest, and employee use. This means that to sell individual cuts of locally raised meats to consumers, farmers and ranchers must first send their animals to one of a limited number of USDA-inspected slaughterhouses. The PRIME Act would expand the current custom exemption.
Some in the meat industry do not support the PRIME Act. The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) released a statement, claiming the PRIME Act is a threat to food safety. “NCBA is in favor of reducing regulatory burdens, but not at the expense of food safety,” said NCBA President Todd Wilkinson, a South Dakota cattle producer. “While the PRIME Act is well-intentioned, allowing uninspected beef to enter the retail market is dangerous to consumers.”
Likewise, North American Meat Institute (NAMI) CEO Julie Anna Potts said, "American consumers rely on rigorous USDA inspection to ensure the safety and quality of their meat and poultry. Allowing the meat to enter commerce without inspection — and without alerting consumers they are buying uninspected meat — jeopardizes food safety and will undermine consumer confidence in all meat products. While this bill may be well-intentioned, it poses especially unnecessary risks given the many resources available to help new and small facilities gain inspection from FSIS."
In fact, I tweeted in support of an earlier iteration of Massie's PRIME Act, which earned a like from the Congressman's official account, though it may have been a staffer, not Massie himself. I've had work colleagues who hunted deer and used non-USDA slaughterhouses. I remember a former boss, so pissed at Bush's reelection that he went out and killed a deer, bringing a pot of venison chili. to share at work (No, I didn't take any, but it smelled amazing.)
+
I'm not going to go into a blow-by-blow story of the differences between Massie and Trump. Let me point out that Massie himself claims that he's voted with Trump's preferences 91% of the time, and I haven't seen a rebuttal of that claim. (I myself have issues with Massie's restrictions on immigration, his support of the SAVE Act, and his votes against Trump's impeachments.) But Trump's first (unsuccessful) attempt to primary Massie was in response to Massie's putting speed bumps on Trump's first-term pandemic spending priority that Massie, a fiscal hawk, opposed.
Trump's criticism that Massie is a "RINO".is patently absurd; after all, the RINO-in-Chief was, in fact, a registered Democrat in the 2000s and in fact supported Clinton and then Obama in 2008 for POTUS. Whereas Trump embraces the economic nationalism/protectionism of Lincoln and others, the early 20th century GOP had polarized into 2 factions: progressivism and conservative Old Right:
Libertarians like Massie and me tend to favor the Old Right's non-interventionism and free trade:
So, you need to look at Massie's differences with Trump in the context of Old Right- like principles, not in Trump's personalization of Massie's politics.. If you go through
Wikipedia's review of Massie, probable sins against Trump:
- Massie endorsed Florida governor Ron DeSantis for president in the 2024 election, saying that "America needs a leader who is decisive, respects the Constitution, understands policy, puts family first, and leads by inspiring
- In 2025, Massie was one of two Republicans to vote against the Senate-approved version of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
- In September 2025, Massie filed a discharge petition[ with the hope of forcing a vote on releasing the Epstein files. The discharge successfully passed,
- Massie is a critic of the PATRIOT Act and warrantless surveillance of Americans
- Massie was the only member of the House to vote against extending sanctions on Iran in 2016.He was also one of three House members to vote against a 2017 bill to impose new sanctions on Iran, Russia, and North Korea.
- Massie joined eight Democratic representatives in 2021 in voting against $1 billion in funding for Israel's Iron Dome air defense system, saying that he opposed all foreign aid out of concern about the national debt
- In October 2023, Massie was the only Republican to vote against a House resolution guaranteeing U.S. support for Israel's military actions in Gaza
- Massie has supported various efforts to scale back the use of the U.S. military abroad. He supported legislation in 2019 to repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force of 2001, arguing that it is too broad and that Congress should reclaim its constitutional responsibility to declare war. He also supported efforts to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq and Afghanistan,[and introduced a bill in 2019 to clarify that no authority exists for military action against Iran. Massie introduced legislation to stop unauthorized military operations in Egypt and Syria,as well as legislation blocking unauthorized military aid from being sent to Syrian rebels.Massie opposes bills that sanction foreign governments
I could go on, but I think the point has been made. But why was Trump targeting Massie? It's patently absurd? There is no large libertarian caucus in the House; he's been more of a gadfly, often a solitary dissent. Now, given a razor-thin House majority, perhaps even losing a single vote may be an issue to Trump, but the fact is that Trump in 2024 did not have legislative coattails. That is not a Massie issue.
