Biden Just Put a Beer Magnate in Charge of Solving the Global Hunger Crisis

Born rich, Cindy McCain has little experience with hunger, agriculture, or climate policy.

Cindy McCain with Joe Biden at an event in Germany in 2018Andreas Gebert/DPA/Zuma

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to roil Africa, India, and Latin America, droughts are crippling major global food-production regions (see California, Iowa, Brazil, Australia) and food prices are on the rise. Not surprisingly, so is hunger. According to the United Nations’ latest numbers from last year, nearly 690 million people are hungry, or 8.9 percent of the world population—“up by 10 million people in one year and by nearly 60 million in five years.” The main culprits for the surge: climate change disasters and the pandemic. By 2030, if present trends continue, the global poverty rate will likely rise to nearly 10 percent, the UN added.

Amid this metastasizing crisis, President Joe Biden has made his choice for role of ambassador to the UN’s Rome-based Food and Agriculture Organization, the group tasked with coordinating efforts to meet a zero-hunger goal: Cindy McCain, the Arizona-based beer magnate, philanthropist, and widow of long-time Republican senator, presidential hopeful, and self-proclaimed “maverick” John McCain. 

Cindy McCain has no obvious qualifications for the job—beyond appealing to the presidential tradition of using ambassadorships to reward political cronies. Biden and John McCain were famously chummy in their decades together in the Senate, and Cindy McCain cast aside her lifetime devotion to the Republican Party by endorsing Biden in the 2020 election.

The White House press release announcing the pick noted no experience in food or agriculture policy. McCain is the chair and director of the Hensley Beverage Company in Phoenix, the region’s dominant distributor of beer brands owned by the global beer behemoth AB InBev, a lucrative enterprise she inherited from her father. Her philanthropy, the McCain Institute, focuses on things like “developing character-driven leaders,” “international rule of law and security,” and “combating human trafficking.” Neither hunger nor agriculture figure among the foundation’s seven programs. 

“We had big hopes that the Biden administration would name somebody for this ambassadorship with a deep knowledge of the issues and a deep commitment to working with and defending the rights and interests of the communities who are on the front lines of the fight against hunger and poverty, and for climate justice,” Tristan Quinn-Thibodeau, national campaigner for the anti-poverty group ActionAid USA, told Mother Jones. The FAO ambassadorship is incredibly policy-oriented,” Quinn-Thibodeau said. The group helps develop guidelines for governments to follow, he explained, “to ensure that their food and agriculture systems are based in equity and fairness and justice—and are able to be sustainable into the future—and not lead us into some kind of apocalyptic situation where the fields are burning because it’s getting too hot and there’s drought.”

Quinn-Thibodeau called the appointment of McCain “extremely disappointing” and a sign that Biden isn’t taking the issue seriously. He noted that Donald Trump also tapped a political ally to the post: Kip Tom, an Indiana agribusiness executive with close ties to the pesticide industry but no discernible experience in hunger advocacy.

Meanwhile, the fight to reduce hunger amid climate chaos is losing ground. Back in 2015, the United Nations announced the goal of ending hunger “everywhere” by 2030. While undeniably ambitious, the idea had momentum behind it. Between 2005 and 2014, the global hunger rate fell from 12.6 percent to 8.6 percent, with the number of hungry people dropping from 825.6 million to 628.9 million. Since then, progress has stalled. “The world is not on track to achieve Zero Hunger by 2030,” a 2020 UN report conceded. Hunger is ticking up, even as climate change threatens to keep hammering farm regions across the globe. The report added: “This is an alarming scenario, even without taking into account the potential impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate