
Paul Vallas: Two years in, Mayor Brandon Johnson's rhetoric doesn't match reality
Mayor Brandon Johnson's first two years in office can best be described as delusional. Even from a progressive perspective, there is a glaring disconnect between his rhetoric and reality.
Johnson has declared his tenure the most accomplished of any mayor in Chicago history and claims the city is now a national model for building a worker-centered, safe and affordable city. But his proudest accomplishments amount to little more than a progressive Potemkin village.
For example, he opened just three of 12 mental health facilities closed by Mayor Rahm Emanuel. His reestablished Department of Environment is an office with a few staff members and no real authority or resources. Johnson's flagship initiative — a $1.25 billion bond program — is a continuation of the city practice of bonding for capital investments. His 'Green Social Housing' ordinance is a small low-interest loan program and no substitute for a serious affordable housing policy.
These checkbox initiatives, among others, are designed more for optics than substance. Despite his rhetoric, Johnson has done little to confront the city's mounting problems. Instead, he resorts to playing the race card to explain the challenges he inherited and his own failures to address them.
As Johnson completes his second year, what is his record? And what is the real state of the city?
Finances
Johnson or his administration has done nothing to address the financial storm engulfing the city, schools and public transit system — each faces historic deficits in the coming year. The city projects a budget shortfall exceeding $1 billion. The new teachers contract pushes Chicago Public Schools' deficit to more than $800 million, and the CTA faces a $600 million revenue shortfall. Meanwhile, the mayor's backing of a $1.5 billion contract with the Chicago Teachers Union makes it virtually impossible to balance either the city or CPS budget without major tax hikes.
Taxes
While the City Council blocked a property tax hike, the mayor's school board has increased property taxes each year. Voters resoundingly rejected Johnson's proposed increase in the real estate transfer tax, yet he continues to advocate for other campaign tax proposals, including a city income tax, a head tax on employers and a financial transaction tax. Chicago already leads major cities in property and sales taxes and fees, and our commercial property tax burden is among the highest in the nation.
The new $1.5 billion CTU contract almost guarantees annual property tax hikes but adds no instructional time or accountability measures. The mayor's hand-picked school board has effectively reinstated social promotion and eliminated any meaningful accountability for underperforming students, schools or teachers. The contract also undermines successful public school alternatives for low-income families such as public charter and magnet schools.
Police staffing remains 1,700 officers below pre-COVID-19 levels, in part due to the mayor's elimination of 833 positions. While homicides and shootings have declined nationally since the pandemic, Chicago has until this year ranked near the bottom of large cities in homicide reduction. Overall, violent crime remains above pre-pandemic levels and is likely underreported, given the decline in high-priority 911 responses since 2019.
The mayor's economic policy has focused on growing the public sector and expanding subsidies through public-private partnerships, rather than fostering a business-friendly environment. Johnson fulfilled a promise to eliminate the subminimum wage for tipped workers — a policy that imposes a costly, unfunded mandate on small and midsize businesses.
Johnson and his administration have no coherent affordable housing strategy. The administration has failed to leverage tools such as tax abatements, reactivation of vacant properties or creation of opportunity zones to combat disinvestment or gentrification. Johnson's promise to 'cut the tape' has amounted to little more than bureaucratic reshuffling with no substantive outcomes.
The CTA faces a huge deficit next year and needs to restore ridership to pre-COVID-19 levels to avoid deep service cuts. That requires that the CTA become significantly safer. Yet the mayor-controlled CTA continues to spend money on private, unarmed security. That money could increase the number of Chicago police officers assigned to the CTA by 500. Currently, the CTA has just over 100 police officers dedicated to transit — roughly the same as the mayor's own security detail.
Johnson has fully embraced Chicago's sanctuary city status, largely refusing to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement while offering aid to migrants, including emergency housing, medical care, legal services and de facto protection from immigration authorities. The city has spent more than $600 million on migrant services.
Johnson has failed to advance a single piece of anti-corruption legislation. He has clashed with City Council ethics chair Ald. Matt Martin and Inspector General Deborah Witzburg, who accused his administration of building 'brick walls' against oversight and transparency.
In two years, little of substance has been done to address Chicago's mounting challenges. Look to the mayor to continue refusing to take responsibility for anything — preferring to deflect, gaslight and race-bait instead.
Paul Vallas is an adviser for the Illinois Policy Institute. He ran against Johnson for Chicago mayor in 2023 and was previously budget director for the city and CEO of Chicago Public Schools.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mike Johnson Offers Bizarre Justification For ICE Masks. Backlash Follows.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) faced criticism after he defended the wearing of masks by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents during immigration raids. Johnson was asked by Fox News to respond to concerns from Democrats who say ICE agents shouldn't conceal their identities while conducting arrests as part of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. 'From the people who mandated mask-wearing for years in America, it's absurd,' Johnson fired back, referencing the face-covering measures that Democrats implemented during the coronavirus pandemic in a bid to stop the spread of COVID-19. 'They need to back off of ICE and respect our agents and stop protesting against them,' he added, arguing that agents would be doxed if they were able to be identified. Critics pointed out the irony of Johnson's acceptance of agents wearing masks, given his history of opposing mask mandates for medical reasons, and suggested he had conjured up an extreme example of false equivalence. Agents should be able to be held accountable, they argued. Johnson was also criticized over the weekend for dismissing concerns about Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's talk of active-duty Marines tackling protests against immigration enforcement in Los Angeles. 'I don't think that's heavy-handed,' Johnson said. Karoline Leavitt Squirms Over Maria Bartiromo's Blunt Question About Elon Musk Trump Accused Of Inciting Violence With Chilling New Rhyme German Leader Politely Shuts Down Trump's Hot Take On D-Day
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
LA unrest marks latest clash of US presidents, states over National Guard
Donald Trump's deployment of California's National Guard marks the first time in decades that a US president openly defied a state governor and sent troops to an emergency zone. By ordering 2,000 guardsmen to Los Angeles to help quell protests against raids by US immigration agents, Trump essentially mounted a takeover of the state's military regiments to address "lawlessness" on the city's streets. The National Guard is a reserve military rooted in the 17th century local militias created in the American colonies before the country's founding. Since then the guard has had multiple responsibilities: domestic disaster relief and security, homeland defense and prevention of civil unrest; and acting as reserve forces for US military deployments overseas. Presidential orders to deploy guardsmen domestically are not uncommon. But clashes between a president and governor over deployments -- or the lack thereof, such as during the US Capitol riot by Trump supporters on January 6, 2021 while he was still in office -- have been rare. - Los Angeles, 2025 - The White House said Trump relied on a seldom used law, known as Title 10, that permits National Guard federalization in times of "a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States." California Governor Gavin Newsom called the decision "purposefully inflammatory." But Trump's order proceeded, and the guard troops were on LA streets Sunday. "This is the first time since 1965 that a president has deployed the National Guard without a request by a state governor," Kenneth Roth, a longtime former Human Rights Watch executive director, posted on X. "Then it was (president Lyndon) Johnson protecting civil rights protesters. Now it's Trump creating a spectacle so he can continue his immigration raids." Elizabeth Goitein of the Brennan Center for Justice warned of a "shocking abuse of power" by Trump, whose memorandum authorizes federalization of National Guard troops "at locations where protests against (federal immigration) functions are occurring or are likely to occur." "Trump has authorized the deployment of troops anywhere in the country where protests against ICE activity might occur," Goitein posted on X. "That is a huge red flag." - Alabama, 1965 - A landmark civil rights moment led to a National Guard clash between a president and a segregationist governor. With demonstrators led by Martin Luther King Jr on a five-day march from Selma to Alabama's capital Montgomery, governor George Wallace pledged National Guard security -- but then reneged. The U-turn incensed Johnson who, in defiance of Wallace, called up the guard. The march was protected by thousands of Army soldiers and federalized guard members. - Arkansas, 1957 - When the Little Rock school system was ordered desegregated, Arkansas' pro-segregationist governor Orval Faubus deployed the National Guard to surround a high school and prevent nine Black students from entering. President Dwight Eisenhower bristled at the standoff and told Faubus the guard must maintain order so the Black students could attend. Instead, Faubus pulled the guardsmen, leaving security to local forces. Eisenhower issued an executive order federalizing the Arkansas National Guard, and ordered 1,000 US Army troops to join them. - Kent State, 1970 - Perhaps no anti-Vietnam war protest was more pivotal than at Ohio's Kent State University, where students slammed Richard Nixon's war expansion. As unrest swelled, the National Guard opened fire, killing four students and wounding nine others. The shootings sparked outrage, but also led to reforms regarding how the guard handles civil unrest and use of force. - Hurricane Katrina, 2005 - The massive hurricane left much of New Orleans underwater, leading to the largest-ever peacetime deployment of the National Guard. But critics accused then-president George W Bush of favoring a militaristic response over humanitarian relief. Louisiana's governor, Kathleen Blanco, warned that many among the thousands of National Guard and federal troops were battle-tested Iraq war veterans. "These troops know how to shoot and kill and I expect they will," she reportedly said. - Outside White House, 2020 - June 1, 2020 saw a brutal crackdown on demonstrators following the police murder of African-American George Floyd. With people aggressively protesting near the White House, the National Guard joined police to maintain order. Flash grenades and tear gas were deployed. Unlike in the nation's 50 states, the DC National Guard is under direct command of the US president, who at the time was Trump. mlm/st


The Hill
13 hours ago
- The Hill
Speaker Johnson teases follow-ups to the ‘one big, beautiful bill'
The 'one big, beautiful bill' may not be so singular, after all. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is teasing follow-up legislation to the megabill of President Trump's tax cut and spending priorities that Republicans can push though using the same special budget reconciliation process that requires only GOP votes. That tool can be used once per fiscal year, with the current fiscal year ending on Sept. 30. So after Republicans are done with the 'big, beautiful bill,' the GOP trifecta has, in theory, two more shots to muscle through party-line legislation before the next Congress comes into power after the midterms. Johnson floated plans for a second reconciliation bill while rebutting concerns from deficit hawks on the budget impact of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — which includes an extension of tax cuts and boosts to border and defense funding, with costs offset in part by new requirements on low-income assistance programs like Medicaid and food aid. 'Everyone here wants to reduce spending,' Johnson said Friday morning on CNBC. 'But you have to do that in a sequence of events. We have a plan, OK? This is the first of a multistep process.' 'We're going to have another reconciliation bill that follows this one, possibly a third one before this Congress is up, because you can have a reconciliation bill for each budget year, each fiscal year. So that's ahead of us,' Johnson continued, also pointing to separate plans to claw back money based on recommendations from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 'We're also doing rescissions packages. We got the first one delivered this week from the White House, and that will codify many of the DOGE cuts.' The promise of another reconciliation bill is somewhat surprising given the crux of the debate that dominated the early weeks of the year: Should Republicans divide up their agenda into two bills, passing the first quickly to give Trump an early win on boosting funding for border enforcement and deportations? Or would putting all of Trump's priorities into one bill — which would contain both bitter pills and sweeteners for different factions of the razor-thin majority — be a better political strategy? Trump eventually said he preferred 'one big, beautiful bill,' a moniker that became the legislation's official title in the House last month. It's not clear what would be in a second piece of legislation. Multiple House Republicans who spoke with The Hill were unaware of plans for more reconciliation bills and were not sure what could be included in them. 'I think we need to see what's left on the table after the first one,' Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) said. And to muster through multiple reconciliation bills is a delicate prospect. If members know more reconciliation bills are coming, that complicates the argument that everything in the current package — even policies some factions dislike that others love — need to stay in one megabill. The Speaker declined to elaborate on what might be in such a package when asked in a press conference last week. 'I'm not going to tell you that,' Johnson said. 'Let's get the first one done.' 'Look, I say this is the beginning of a process, and what you're going to see is a continuing of us identifying waste, fraud, abuse in government, which is our pledge of common sense, restoring common sense and fiscal sanity. So we have lots of ideas of things that might be in that package.' Republicans had started planning for the current legislative behemoth months before the 2024 election so they would be prepared to quickly execute on their policy wish list if they won the majority. 'This isn't something we just drew up overnight. So, we'll go through that same laborious process,' Johnson said. But some members have ideas of what else they'd like to see. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said that he'd hope a second bill would do more to tackle rolling back green energy tax credits and make further spending cuts. Ultimately, though, it will be Trump's call, Norman said: 'I know when the president gets involved, it adds a lot of value.' And Rep. August Pfluger (R-Texas) speculated that passing the 'big, beautiful bill' would inspire members to keep going with another bill. 'People like the feeling of winning,' Pfluger said.