More stories

  • in

    No Degree? No Problem. Biden Tries to Bridge the ‘Diploma Divide.’

    President Biden is trying to appeal to working-class voters by emphasizing his plans to create well-paid jobs that do not require a college degree.When President Biden told a crowd of union workers this year that every American should have a path to a good career — “whether they go to college or not” — Tyler Wissman was listening.A father of one with a high school education, Mr. Wissman said he rarely heard politicians say that people should be able to get ahead without a college degree.“In my 31 years, it was always, ‘You gotta go to college if you want a job,’” said Mr. Wissman, who is training as an apprentice at the Finishing Trades Institute in Philadelphia, where the president spoke in March.As Mr. Biden campaigns for re-election, he is trying to bridge an educational divide that is reshaping the American political landscape. Even though both political parties portray education as crucial for advancement and opportunity, college-educated voters are now more likely to identify as Democrats, while those without college degrees are more likely to support Republicans.That increasingly clear split has enormous implications for Mr. Biden as he tries to expand the coalition of voters that sent him to the White House in the first place. In 2020, Mr. Biden won 61 percent of college graduates, but only 45 percent of voters without a four-year college degree — and just 33 percent of white voters without a four-year degree.“The Democratic Party has become a cosmopolitan, college-educated party even though it’s a party that considers itself a party of working people,” said David Axelrod, a top adviser to former President Barack Obama.Mr. Axelrod added that the perception that Wall Street had been bailed out during the 2008 recession while the middle class was left to struggle deepened the fissure between Democrats and blue-collar workers who did not attend college.The election of Donald J. Trump, who harnessed many of those grievances for political gain, solidified the trend.“There’s a sense among working-class voters, and not just white working-class voters, that the party doesn’t relate to them or looks down on people who work with their hands or work with their backs or do things that don’t require college education,” Mr. Axelrod said.Now, in speeches around the country, Mr. Biden rarely speaks about his signature piece of legislation, a $1 trillion infrastructure bill, without also emphasizing that it will lead to trade apprenticeships and, ultimately, union jobs.“Let’s offer every American a path to a good career whether they go to college or not, like the path you started here,” Mr. Biden said at the trades institute, referring to its apprenticeship program.The White House says apprenticeship programs, which typically combine some classroom learning with paid on-the-job experience, are crucial to overcoming a tight labor market and ensuring that there is a sufficient work force to turn the president’s sprawling spending plan into roads, bridges and electric vehicle chargers.Mr. Biden has offered incentives for creating apprenticeships, with hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants for states that expand such programs.“Biden is the first president that’s reducing the need to get a college degree since World War II,” said Douglas Brinkley, a presidential historian.Mr. Biden now rarely mentions his investments in infrastructure without citing trade apprenticeships that can lead to union jobs.Rachel Wisniewski for The New York TimesMr. Biden’s approach is a shift from previous Democratic administrations, which were far more focused on college as a path to higher pay and advancement. Mr. Obama, during his first joint session of Congress, said that the United States should “once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world.”Mr. Obama’s wife, Michelle Obama, started a campaign encouraging Americans to go to college, at one point suggesting in a satirical video that life without higher education was akin to watching painting dry.Democrats have long walked a careful line on the issue. Mr. Biden has been a champion of higher education, particularly community colleges, and one of his most ambitious proposals as president was a $400 billion program to forgive up to $20,000 in student loan debt for individuals who earn under $125,000 a year. Republicans have portrayed that proposal as a giveaway for elites.Mitch Landrieu, the president’s infrastructure coordinator, said Mr. Biden had always believed college was important, but “it is absolutely not the only way to build an economy.”“He sees that men and women like that have been left behind for a long time,” Mr. Landrieu said of people without college degrees. “They’ve always been part of the Democratic Party. It’s not until recently that’s changed.”The shift coincides with a stark political reality.The battleground states that voted for the winning candidate in both 2016 and 2020 rank roughly in the middle on higher-education levels, which means that Mr. Biden’s effort to appeal to those without a degree could make a real difference in 2024, according to Doug Sosnik, a former senior adviser to President Bill Clinton.“You need to both try to mitigate losses with noncollege voters and at the same time try to exploit the advantage in those states with educated voters,” Mr. Sosnik said. “You can’t rely on the diploma divide solely to win. But it’s part of the formula.”Instructors at the Finishing Trades Institute in Philadelphia say they have noticed an increase in demand.Rachel Wisniewski for The New York TimesA similar dynamic is playing out nationwide.Gov. Josh Shapiro, Democrat of Pennsylvania, released campaign ads focused on expanding apprenticeships and removing requirements for college degrees for thousands of state government jobs — a pledge he made good on when he entered office. His fellow Democratic governor in New Jersey has also removed similar degree requirements, as have Republicans in Maryland, Alaska and Utah.Gov. Spencer Cox, Republican of Utah, said he was not only hoping to address a stigma attached to those who do not attend college but also appease employers increasingly anxious about persistent worker shortages.“We can’t do any of this stuff if we don’t have a labor force,” Mr. Cox said.Christopher Montague, 29, an Air Force veteran from the Philadelphia suburbs, who trained as an apprentice in drywall instead of going to college, said he had noticed an “awakening” by politicians on the upside of pursuing training in trades.“There is money in working with your hands,” he said.At the Finishing Trades Institute in Philadelphia, instructors say they have noticed an increase in demand. Drew Heverly, an industrial painting instructor, said he typically had 10 apprentices working on construction projects in “a good year.”“We’ve definitely seen the ramp-up and the need for manpower,” Drew Heverly said about industrial painting.Rachel Wisniewski for The New York TimesThis year, he has already sent nearly 40 apprentices to work on projects in Philadelphia that are partially funded by Mr. Biden’s infrastructure package.“We’ve definitely seen the ramp-up and the need for manpower,” Mr. Heverly said.The prospect of pursuing an education in trade while earning money on projects has also gained momentum among high school students, according to the Finishing Trades Institute’s recruitment coordinator, Tureka Dixon. Community colleges in the area are even reaching out to see if they can form joint partnerships to train students on trade.“Whether it’s cranes, high-rise buildings, bridges, that is trade work,” Ms. Dixon said as the apprentices in hard hats listened to a lesson on lead removals. “That is physical labor. That is the country, so I think people need to consider it more.”Mark Smith, 30, who is training as an apprentice at the institute, said learning a trade was not a fallback position for him — it was his preferred career.“School wasn’t for me,” Mr. Smith said. “I did the Marine Corps and then I started right in this. For me it was a waste of money.”Mr. Wissman, who has never voted in a presidential election and identifies as an independent, said he was not sure yet if the recognition from the White House would move him to finally vote in the 2024 election.“I want in office whoever is going to help me put food on my table,” said Mr. Wissman, whose girlfriend is pregnant with their second child. “At the end of the day, that’s all it’s going to come down to.” More

  • in

    United Auto Workers Hold Off on Backing Biden, for Now

    A memo by the union’s president underscores how some of President Biden’s moves to fight climate change could weaken some of his political support.The United Auto Workers, a politically potent labor union, is planning to withhold its endorsement of President Biden in the early stages of the 2024 race, according to an internal memo from its president to members on Tuesday.The memo, written by Shawn Fain, the Detroit-based union’s president, said the leadership of the United Auto Workers had traveled to Washington last week to meet with Biden administration officials and had expressed “our concerns with the electric vehicle transition” that the president has pursued.The memo underscores how some of Mr. Biden’s boldest moves to fight climate change, which animate his liberal base, could at the same time weaken his political support among another crucial constituency. The U.A.W. has shrunk in size in recent decades, but it still counts about 400,000 active members, with a robust presence in Michigan, a critical battleground state for Democrats.In April, the Biden administration proposed the nation’s most ambitious climate regulations yet, which would ensure that two-thirds of new passenger cars are all-electric by 2032 — up from just 5.8 percent today. The rules, if enacted, could sharply lower planet-warming pollution from vehicle tailpipes, the nation’s largest source of greenhouse emissions. But they come with costs for autoworkers, because it takes fewer than half the laborers to assemble an all-electric vehicle as it does to build a gasoline-powered car.In the memo, Mr. Fain provided “talking points” for members about why the union was not immediately lining up behind Mr. Biden, writing that if companies received federal subsidies, then workers “must be compensated with top wages and benefits.”“The EV transition is at serious risk of becoming a race to the bottom,” the memo reads, referring to electric vehicles. “We want to see national leadership have our back on this before we make any commitments.”Mr. Fain won the U.A.W. presidency as an insurgent candidate this year, toppling the incumbent, Ray Curry. Mr. Fain promised a more confrontational path ahead of contract talks. In the memo, he notes that 150,000 autoworkers are fighting for a new contract with the so-called Big Three auto companies in September, writing, “We’ll stand with whoever stands with our members in that fight.”Labor support is a key part of Mr. Biden’s political coalition and his portrayal of himself as a fighter for the middle class.Within hours of Mr. Biden’s formal entry into the 2024 race, a number of top labor unions backed Mr. Biden, including the Amalgamated Transit Union, the Service Employees International Union and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.“Several national unions were quick to endorse,” Mr. Fain wrote in his memo. “The United Auto Workers is not yet making an endorsement.”Mr. Biden’s campaign trumpeted his support from other labor unions in a news release. Notably, Mr. Biden’s first public appearance after announcing his re-election campaign last week was addressing a labor conference in the nation’s capital.“I’ve said many times: Wall Street didn’t build America,” he told the cheering union crowd last week. “The middle class built America, and unions built the middle class!”The United Auto Workers, which has historically endorsed Democrats and supported Mr. Biden in 2020, makes clear in the memo that it has no intent of backing the Republican front-runner, former President Donald J. Trump. Withholding a formal endorsement for now instead appears to be a bid for leverage or concessions from the administration.“Another Donald Trump presidency would be a disaster,” reads Mr. Fain’s memo, which was first reported by The Detroit News. “But our members need to see an alternative that delivers real results. We need to get our members organized behind a pro-worker, pro-climate, and pro-democracy political program that can deliver for the working class.”Mr. Biden has sought to accelerate the transition to all-electric vehicles as a centerpiece of his effort to tackle climate change. A 2021 report by the International Energy Agency found that nations would have to stop sales of new gasoline-powered cars by 2035 to avert the deadliest effects of a warming planet.To help reach that goal, Mr. Biden has pushed a fleet of policies designed to promote electric vehicles. The Biden administration’s proposed climate regulations announced in April are designed to add legal teeth to consumer incentives, compelling automakers to manufacture and sell more electric vehicles. The Environmental Protection Agency rules, however, are not yet final: They are open for public comment, and could still be weakened or otherwise changed before being completed next year.As the Biden administration prepared to unveil the new clean car rules last month, officials planned for Michael S. Regan, the head of the E.P.A., to announce the policies in Detroit, surrounded by American-made all-electric vehicles.But as auto executives and the United Auto Workers learned the details of the proposed regulations, some grew uneasy about publicly supporting it, according to two people familiar with their thinking. No one from the United Auto Workers attended the unveiling, according to the organization’s spokesman, although representatives from Ford, General Motors and Mercedes-Benz were there.And the setting was moved from Detroit to the E.P.A. headquarters in Washington. More

  • in

    How Randi Weingarten Landed at the Heart of America’s Political Fights

    Listen to This ArticleAudio Recording by AudmWhen the former secretary of state and C.I.A. director Mike Pompeo, a man who had dealt firsthand with autocrats like Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, described Randi Weingarten as “the most dangerous person in the world” last November, it seemed as though he couldn’t possibly be serious.Weingarten is 65 and just over five feet tall. She is Jewish and openly gay — she’s married to a rabbi — and lives in Upper Manhattan. She is the longtime president of the American Federation of Teachers, which is not even the country’s biggest union of public-school educators. (The A.F.T. has 1.7 million members; the National Education Association has three million.) The A.F.T. did give in excess of $26 million to Democratic candidates and causes in the 2022 election cycle, but the Carpenters and Joiners union gave more than twice as much.Pompeo, whose remarks appeared in a widely quoted interview with the online news site Semafor, had nevertheless put his finger on something: The pandemic and the ongoing culture wars over race and gender had shifted America’s educational landscape, and with it the political landscape. “It’s not a close call,” Pompeo elaborated. “If you ask, ‘Who’s the most likely to take this republic down?’ It would be the teachers’ unions, and the filth that they’re teaching our kids, and the fact that they don’t know math and reading or writing.”Other Republicans quickly piled on. Pompeo had set the bar high, and they needed to invoke equally hot rhetoric and florid imagery to ensure headlines of their own. “Big labor unions have taken over public education,” Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina told Fox News in late January. “That’s bad for parents, bad for kids, bad for America.” Senator Marco Rubio of Florida mounted his attack in The American Conservative magazine: “Our schools are a cesspool of Marxist indoctrination. Dangerous academic constructs like critical race theory and radical gender theory are being forced on elementary school children.” Gov. Ron DeSantis, who had already garnered national attention with his book bans, Florida’s “Stop WOKE Act” and its so-called Don’t Say Gay legislation, unveiled a new proposal designed to rein in “overreaching teachers’ unions,” which a column on the Fox website enthusiastically embraced as “a blueprint to dominate union bosses.” Donald Trump, declaring that public schools “have been taken over by the radical left maniacs” and “pink-haired communists,” released his own plan to Save American Education. It was clear that Weingarten had come to stand for something much larger than herself.Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, who has been described as “the most dangerous person in the world” by former C.I.A. director Mike Pompeo.Michal Chelbin for The New York TimesThe last few years have been historically convulsive ones for education in America. Some 1.3 million children left the public schools during the pandemic. The results from the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress — known as the nation’s report card — revealed the largest average score decline in reading since 1990 and the first average score decline in math since 1969. Schools have reported major increases in rates of student depression, anxiety and trauma. School districts around the country are experiencing severe teacher shortages. Last fall, a Gallup poll found that the percentage of adults who are satisfied with the nation’s public schools had fallen to 42 percent, a 20-year low.This crisis has political consequences. The pandemic closures and classroom culture wars have fueled the revival of the dormant school-choice movement, with Republican-led states around the country passing an array of far-reaching school-voucher bills. These bills come in different forms but share a common goal: to enable parents to move their children out of America’s government-run education system en masse. All of the prospective Republican presidential candidates for 2024 have committed to building on this growing movement, whose roots can be traced back more than 50 years, to the battle over desegregation. The same pandemic closures that demonstrated how central public schools are to the communities they serve also became the inciting event for an unprecedented effort to dismantle them.The public-education system may not be very popular right now, but both Democrats and Republicans tend to like their local schools and their children’s teachers. The unions that represent those teachers, however, are more polarizing. One reason for this is that they are actively involved in partisan politics, and, more specifically, are closely aligned with the Democrats, a reality powerfully driven home during the pandemic. A study by Brown University’s Annenberg Institute found that Democratic districts, with correspondingly strong teachers’ unions, returned to in-person learning more slowly and gradually than Republican districts with weaker unions. In some ways, Randi Weingarten and the A.F.T. — the union “boss” and “big labor” — are a logical, even inevitable target for the G.O.P.It’s no longer possible to separate education from politics, and public schools are more vulnerable than they’ve ever been.A frequent knock on the A.F.T. is that it puts teachers before students, a framing neatly encapsulated by a quote attributed to the union’s former president Al Shanker: “When schoolchildren start paying union dues, that’s when I’ll start representing the interests of schoolchildren.” Shanker’s biographer, Richard Kahlenberg, found no record of Shanker’s ever saying this and doesn’t think he ever did, but that hasn’t stopped the union’s critics from citing it. Weingarten has a rebuttal: Good working conditions for teachers make good learning conditions for students. But Weingarten does in fact represent teachers, not students. Often, such as when it comes to issues like classroom size or school budgets, their interests align. Sometimes they don’t. For a period during the pandemic, the two groups’ apparent interests diverged, and a series of fault lines started opening across the country, separating not only Republicans from Democrats but also parents from teachers, centrist Democrats from progressives and urban Black parents from suburban white parents, and even dividing the teachers’ union itself. These fault lines widened as the reopening debates merged into fights over how schools should deal with the teaching of the country’s racial history as well as sexuality and gender identity.What became increasingly clear to me over the last several months, as I spoke to dozens of politicians, political consultants, union leaders, parent activists and education scholars about the convulsions in American education, is that it’s no longer possible to separate education from politics, and that public schools are more vulnerable than they’ve ever been. How did Randi Weingarten wind up at the center of the 2024 Republican primary? The only way to answer that question is to re-examine America’s education wars and the competing political agendas that are driving them. “Oh, goodness, no! Not at all!” Pompeo answered when I asked if he was, perhaps, being hyperbolic in his remarks about Weingarten. “It’s not just about Ms. Weingarten, but she has been the most visible face of the destruction of American education.”In the chaotic early months of the pandemic, teachers were celebrated as essential workers, heroically continuing to serve America’s children from their homes, often with limited resources and inadequate technology. But during the summer of 2020, things started to shift. There was already early research showing that students were suffering academically from remote learning. Schools across Europe had begun reopening without any major outbreaks, and many of America’s private and parochial schools were making plans to resume in-person learning at the start of the new school year. A lot of public-school parents wanted their children to be back in the classroom, too. But many teachers seemed resistant to the idea.Because of the decentralized structure of America’s public-education system, which has some 14,000 different school districts, the federal government could not order schools to reopen for in-person learning, but in July 2020, President Trump threatened to withhold federal funds from those that didn’t. His education secretary, Betsy DeVos, echoed his sentiments, demanding that the nation’s schools be “fully operational” by the fall without providing a specific plan for doing so.Protesters carrying a makeshift coffin in New York City in 2020.Associated PressMany members of the A.F.T. remained worried about putting themselves, their families and their communities at risk. The A.F.T. had issued its own reopening plan in late April, calling for adequate personal protective equipment, a temporary suspension of formal teacher performance evaluations, a limit on student testing, a cancellation of student-loan debt and a $750 billion federal aid package to help schools prepare to reopen safely and facilitate “a real recovery for all our communities.” Weingarten did not believe the Trump administration was giving schools what teachers needed to return to work safely. She publicly denounced Trump and DeVos’s call to reopen as “reckless,” “callous” and “cruel,” and the A.F.T. passed a resolution supporting local strikes if schools were forced to reopen in areas where a variety of safety conditions hadn’t been met. As if to underscore the point, some teachers took to the streets in protest with mock coffins.Florida became a test case. Even as the state’s Covid death rate was surging in July, its Department of Education issued an emergency order requiring schools to fully reopen in August. The state’s largest teachers’ union, the Florida Education Association, affiliated with both the A.F.T. and the N.E.A., sued DeSantis and his education commissioner, Richard Corcoran, among others, to block the reopenings, arguing that the order violated the state’s Constitution, which guarantees Florida residents the right to “safe” and “secure” public schools. At a virtual news conference announcing the lawsuit, Weingarten accused DeSantis of being in “intense denial.” After some Florida schools started reopening, an A.F.T. political action committee produced a TV ad attacking Trump, citing claims that schools were becoming superspreader sites and that children were being used as “guinea pigs.” As the lawsuit was working its way through the legal system — the union won in the lower court but lost on appeal — Florida was holding its biannual school-board elections, and the prospective return to in-person learning became the defining issue in many races. In Brevard County, Tina Descovich, the incumbent, was in favor of an immediate return to the classroom and opposed mask mandates. She was challenged by a public-school speech-language pathologist, Jennifer Jenkins, who called for a more cautious approach, including a mask mandate for all but the youngest children. Jenkins easily won the late-August election, but Descovich was just getting started. She called Tiffany Justice, a fellow school-board member in nearby Indian River County, to suggest that they create their own parents’ rights group, Moms for Liberty. “We’ve got to do something here,” Justice recalled Descovich’s telling her. “We have to help these parents because they’re trying to step up and speak out, and the schools are just slamming them at every turn.”Tina Descovich, right, who was on the Brevard County school board and opposed mask mandates, started the parents’ rights group Moms for Liberty with a fellow former school-board member, Tiffany Justice.Octavio Jones/Getty ImagesOther parents across the political spectrum started organizing, too. Many public schools hadn’t fully reopened for the start of the new school year, and they were frustrated. They wrote op-eds, held rallies or met via Zoom with school-board members and other elected officials, often finding themselves at odds with local teachers’ unions and union-backed school-board members. The first fault lines had started to open.By the fall of 2020, the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer and the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement had prompted a national reckoning over race, as well as an ensuing backlash. The politics of the pandemic had begun to merge with the culture wars, and both were playing out most vividly in the American classroom. An esoteric academic term — critical race theory, or C.R.T. — had improbably become the rallying cry for a conservative campaign focused on the teaching of the nation’s racial history. President Trump, running for re-election, eagerly took up the cause, blaming “decades of left-wing indoctrination in our schools” for the Black Lives Matter protests and urging America’s parents to fight back against efforts to teach their children “hateful lies about this country.”The A.F.T. championed the new movement for racial equity, committing publicly to the fight to end “systemic racism in America.” Some of the A.F.T.’s locals went further. The Chicago Teachers Union took to the streets to demand that the city’s board of education cancel a $33 million contract between Chicago’s public schools and its Police Department for the safety officers who staff the city’s public schools. United Teachers Los Angeles helped lead a successful fight to press its school district to slash its police budget by $25 million and use the money instead to hire more counselors, psychologists and social workers.That October, Weingarten embarked on a cross-country bus tour to get out the vote for Joe Biden. His Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama, had not always been in sync with the A.F.T.; the union opposed elements of Obama’s Race to the Top program, which sent money to states that reformed their public-education systems by, among other things, weakening teacher tenure, introducing data-driven accountability measures and adding more nonunionized charter schools. Biden, by contrast, vowed to focus on neighborhood public schools rather than charters and criticized the standardized-testing regimes and teacher evaluations that were a hallmark of Race to the Top. Weingarten’s name was even floated as a candidate for secretary of education. She didn’t get the job, but she and the head of the N.E.A., Becky Pringle, were invited to the White House on the day after Biden’s inauguration. The teachers’ unions finally had a true ally in the Oval Office. The first lady, Jill Biden, taught at a public community college herself. (“I sleep with an N.E.A. member every night,” President Biden would later quip.) The new administration gave teachers preferential access to the Covid vaccine, behind some other essential workers but ahead of the general population. Biden had pledged to quickly reopen America’s schools, and the A.F.T. was communicating with top officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about its guidelines for doing so, suggesting that the agency add a provision allowing for its recommendations to be revisited if a highly contagious Covid variant emerged. But the anger that had been unleashed by the pandemic closures and the culture wars had not abated.Justice and Descovich, the former Florida school-board members, incorporated Moms for Liberty in early 2021 with a far more ambitious and political agenda than simply advocating a return to maskless, in-person classes. As the group’s mission statement explained, it was “dedicated to fighting for the survival of America by unifying, educating and empowering parents to defend their parental rights at all levels of government.” The group built its brand with bumper magnets and T-shirts emblazoned with the motto “We Do NOT Co-Parent With the Government.” It was embraced by the right-wing media and then by donors eager to turn it into a national movement, while nurturing its grass-roots image, mirroring the model created by the Tea Party, the quasi-populist uprising fueled by conservative billionaires and Fox News. The former Fox host Megyn Kelly headlined a fund-raising event in Florida, speaking about, as Justice recalled, “the woke ideology” coming out of America’s classrooms. Moms for Liberty soon expanded beyond Florida. That summer, a chapter in Tennessee presented an 11-page letter of complaint to the state’s Department of Education, objecting to a curriculum that it said “focuses repeatedly and daily on very dark and divisive slivers of American history” and works to “sow feelings of resentment, shame of one’s skin color and/or fear.” After several Republican states passed laws limiting the teaching of race-related subjects and banning C.R.T., Weingarten gave a speech citing a historian who had compared their efforts to the censorship of the Soviet regime. A clip of the speech spent days in heavy rotation on Fox News, and it inspired an editorial in The Wall Street Journal: “The Teachers Unions Go Woke.”It was not Glenn Youngkin’s plan to turn Virginia’s 2021 governor’s race into a referendum on America’s battles over education. Initially, he was just hoping to prevent his opponent, Terry McAuliffe, from owning an issue that historically favored Democrats. “We couldn’t afford to let them take the fight to us,” Jeff Roe, one of Youngkin’s chief strategists, told me.By almost every measure, Youngkin, a former private-equity executive with no political experience, was the underdog. McAuliffe, a Democratic stalwart dating back to the Clinton presidency, served as Virginia’s governor between 2014 and 2018. (A state law barring governors from serving consecutive terms prevented him from running for re-election.)Biden had beaten Trump by 10 points in Virginia, and McAuliffe led in the early polls. But Virginia’s schools had been among the last on the East Coast to fully reopen, and the lingering bitterness from these pandemic closures had formed a politically combustible mix with the rising culture wars. Amid the national racial reckoning of 2020, Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Fairfax County — one of the top public high schools in the nation — had jettisoned its admissions exam, prompting a lawsuit by 17 families, many of them Asian American, who viewed the change as a form of discrimination against their children.Glenn Youngkin, Republican candidate for governor in Virginia, at a campaign event in Leesburg in 2021.Al Drago, via Getty ImagesSome of the most bitter fights were unfolding in suburban Loudoun County, where a proposal to allow transgender children to choose which bathrooms and pronouns they wished to use had sparked an angry backlash among conservative parents. The tensions were later exacerbated by news of a sexual assault in a high school girls’ bathroom perpetrated by a boy who was wearing a skirt at the time. Loudoun’s increasingly contentious school-board meetings became spectator events, attracting the sustained attention of right-wing media outlets like Fox News and The New York Post.Youngkin held “Save Our Schools” rallies and pledged to ban C.R.T. from the state’s schools. But his campaign’s internal education polls revealed a wide range of voter priorities across the state. The race and gender issues that resonated with his base — Trump voters — weren’t going to be enough to win. He microtargeted other education voters with different ads; it was a scattershot approach, though, at least until a gubernatorial debate in late September.During his tenure as governor, McAuliffe had vetoed a bill — prompted by a mother who objected to her high school senior son’s reading Toni Morrison’s “Beloved” in an A.P. English class — that would have enabled parents to prevent their children from studying material they deemed sexually explicit. When Youngkin criticized that decision on the debate stage, McAuliffe shot back, “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.”Recognizing that they had just been handed a political gift, Youngkin’s staff cobbled together a digital and TV ad that very night, hoping to take advantage of the apparent gaffe before McAuliffe tried to clarify it. “I was sure he was going to walk it back on ‘Morning Joe,’” Roe told me. Instead, McAuliffe stood by his comment, saying that states and local school boards should have authority over what’s taught in schools.Youngkin unified his diffuse education campaign under a new phrase, “Parents Matter,” printing up T-shirts and bumper stickers and holding Parents Matter rallies in suburban and exurban counties that supported Biden in 2020. McAuliffe’s quote became the centerpiece of a rolling series of ads accusing him of going “on the attack against parents.” A longtime critic of organized labor, Youngkin also sought to drive a wedge between teachers and their unions, promising to devote at least $100 million to raise teacher salaries while at the same time saying that McAuliffe would bow to his special-interest allies rather than doing what’s best for children.A vast majority of Virginia’s teachers belong to the N.E.A., which tends to cover more rural areas, not the A.F.T., whose members are generally concentrated in big cities. But Weingarten was friendly with McAuliffe from the Clinton days and was supporting his candidacy on Twitter and cable news, and the A.F.T. was helping him develop his education platform. Weingarten told me that she called McAuliffe after the debate to tell him that he was wrong — that parents should have a role in their children’s education. “Terry made a very bad mistake, which Youngkin capitalized on,” she said. (Through a spokesman, McAuliffe said that he talked to Weingarten regularly during the campaign but has no recollection of her criticizing his remark.)By the fall of 2021, America’s public schools were fully open, but mask mandates were still being hotly contested. Weingarten had been working to try to rebuild trust between some families and their schools. In late September, just a couple of days after the McAuliffe debate, she held a virtual town hall on mask mandates with Open Schools USA, an anti-masking right-wing parents’ rights group that was rallying families to pull their children out of public schools, in an effort to foster open dialogue with the union’s critics.Under Weingarten, who was elected president of the A.F.T. in 2008, the national union has gone all in on electoral politics, significantly increasing its political spending in the belief that the best way to serve its rank and file is by electing Democrats. The A.F.T. gave more than $1 million to McAuliffe, and Weingarten even knocked on doors for him in Alexandria. But Youngkin had the momentum in the final weeks of the race. His candidacy received another boost in October when Attorney General Merrick Garland ordered the F.B.I. to help address the rising threats of violence toward some school-board members. The order stemmed from a letter written to the Biden administration by the National School Boards Association, asking that federal law enforcement address threats against public school officials that “could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism.” But Republican lawmakers and the right-wing media seized on the language in the letter to falsely accuse Garland of labeling parents “domestic terrorists.” Youngkin quickly exploited the opportunity, releasing an ad claiming that the F.B.I. was trying to “silence parents.”On the night before the election, Weingarten headed down to Virginia to warm up the crowd at McAuliffe’s closing rally in Fairfax County. She was eager to be on hand for the final push, and her staff asked for her to be given a speaking role at the rally. Because she had been such a generous and loyal supporter of McAuliffe’s, the campaign didn’t want to say no, even though some Democrats worried that they could be handing Youngkin another gift.Politically speaking, Weingarten played perfectly into Youngkin’s Parents Matter campaign. That spring, a right-wing watchdog group, Americans for Public Trust, had gotten hold of email communications between top officials at the A.F.T. and the C.D.C. about the agency’s school-reopening guidelines through the Freedom of Information Act and had passed them on to The New York Post. The tabloid, which had been gleefully attacking Weingarten for years — dubbing her Whine-garten — trumpeted the story: “Powerful Teachers Union Influenced C.D.C. on School Reopenings, Documents Show.” The rest of the right-wing media and numerous Republican officials instantly jumped on the narrative. Senator Susan Collins of Maine grilled the C.D.C.’s director, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, at a committee hearing over what she called the C.D.C.’s “secret negotiations” with the teachers’ union. Weingarten told me that the C.D.C. had solicited the A.F.T.’s input and that the union hadn’t suggested anything that the agency wasn’t already considering incorporating into its guidelines. But the appearance of a partisan union leader who had privately discussed the future of the nation’s schools with a government agency could be counterproductive in Virginia’s charged political climate.Weingarten at a strike by faculty members and their supporters at the University of Illinois Chicago in January. Associated PressYoungkin’s staff was giddy at the prospect. “I wanted to send them a gift basket,” Kristin Davison, another senior Youngkin strategist, told me. “It was almost as good as when Stacey Abrams came.” Republican elected officials around the country took potshots at their emerging villain. “The union boss responsible for shutting down schools is the final surrogate for Terry McAuliffe’s failing campaign,” Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas wrote on Twitter. “Virginians should vote accordingly!”Youngkin won narrowly, motivating the G.O.P. base and making critical inroads in Loudoun, which had voted overwhelmingly for Biden. “For a closer for a campaign, you would think you would bring in a showstopper,” Betsy DeVos gloated on Fox News on election night. “I guess, in this case, he did bring in a showstopper in Randi Weingarten, because she definitely stopped the show for kids across the country.”To Republicans, Weingarten may be too progressive, but to some members of her own union, she is not progressive enough. As the pandemic dragged on, she found herself caught between the wishes of the Democratic establishment she did not want to alienate and the left-leaning rank and file she represented. In Chicago, this tension came down, in early 2022, to the most elemental question for unions: whether or not to strike.At the time, the new Omicron variant was surging, and Illinois was experiencing a record number of Covid cases and hospitalizations. The A.F.T.’s left-wing local, the Chicago Teachers Union, was concerned about sending its 25,000 members back to the classroom after winter break. The union was hearing similar worries from the Black families whose children make up a large percentage of the 320,000 students in Chicago’s public schools. Many white suburban and exurban parents had been desperate to see their children return to the classroom and were now committed to keeping them there; but many urban Black parents — who tended to live in smaller homes with more family members, had generally lower vaccination rates and had lost more loved ones to the pandemic — had been and remained wary, especially with a new variant spiking.The union demanded mandatory testing for all teachers and students or a temporary return to remote learning. Mayor Lori Lightfoot, a Democrat, balked. President Biden and other prominent Democrats had been unambiguous about their desire for the nation’s schools to remain open. And the recent governor’s election in Virginia had underscored the political danger of introducing more disruptions to in-person learning, especially with the 2022 midterms just around the corner. For Weingarten and the national union, a strike in the country’s third-largest school system would obviously be politically costly.The insurgent group that leads the C.T.U. first came together in 2008, when the bipartisan education-reform movement was sweeping across the country, dividing the Democratic Party. Centrist billionaires and centrist Democrats joined forces to lead the effort to introduce more testing, accountability and free-market competition to the public schools. But the more progressive wing of the party viewed these measures as an attack on the very institution of public education, unleashing the forces of capitalism on what is supposed to be a public good.In Chicago, the reform efforts were led by Arne Duncan, the chief executive of the city’s public-school district and President Obama’s future education secretary. “Neoliberal education reform hit Chicago like a ton of bricks,” Jesse Sharkey, a high school history teacher, told me. Sharkey was a leader of this insurgency and would go on to become president of the C.T.U. from 2018 to 2022. “You’d flip on the TV or pick up a newspaper, and you couldn’t avoid hearing our so-called leaders trashing our schools, talking about their culture of failure,” he says. “It was an environment that was downright hostile to public education.”Sharkey and his fellow insurgents didn’t believe the national union was fighting aggressively enough against these Democratic reformers. Tapping into Chicago’s long history of community-based organizing, they built their own grass-roots movement within the union called the Caucus of Rank-and-File Educators, or CORE. Led by Karen Lewis, a chemistry teacher and union activist, CORE challenged the C.T.U.’s incumbent leadership in 2010 and won control of the Chicago union. Two years later, after the city’s new Democratic mayor, President Obama’s former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, embarked on an ambitious program to close public schools and replace them with charters, the C.T.U. called Chicago’s first teachers’ strike in 25 years. While the C.T.U. was voting on the strike authorization, Weingarten arrived in Chicago to appear on a panel with Emanuel at a conference hosted by the Clinton Global Initiative. It was a stunning turn of events that spoke to the tension between the A.F.T. and its left wing. For the political health of the union, Weingarten felt she needed to preserve her relationships with the country’s most powerful Democratic leaders, many of whom, like Emanuel, were centrist reformers.As the 2012 strike wore on, Emanuel tried to turn the city against the teachers, accusing them of using Chicago’s children as “pawns,” and unsuccessfully sought a court order to force them to return to work. After seven days, the city backed down; the union won major concessions, including a 16 percent raise over four years and the right for teachers who were laid off as part of Emanuel’s ongoing school closures to be given priority for positions at other schools. The strike instantly became a galvanizing event for the union’s more progressive members. Not only does CORE still control the C.T.U., but like-minded left-wing slates have since taken control of A.F.T. locals in several other cities, too, including Los Angeles and Baltimore.These insurgent caucuses are unified by what they call “social justice unionism.” They see public schools’ ongoing struggles to educate their students as inseparable from the larger societal and economic issues facing their working-class members and the poor communities whose children dominate their classrooms. “We are trying to promote a brand of unionism that goes all out in its fight for educational justice and is brave about taking on conflicts,” Sharkey says. “In some ways, we’re less careful about who we piss off nationally.”There is a natural tension between these insurgent movements and the more establishment-oriented national union. In 2015, some rank-and-file members protested the A.F.T.’s decision to issue an early endorsement of Hillary Clinton, to whom Weingarten is close, who was running against the pro-labor Bernie Sanders. But the tension is about more than just politics; it also goes to the heart of the A.F.T.’s identity. To these caucuses, the union’s power comes from the collective strength of its members — from the bottom up — which can conflict with the top-down leadership style of Weingarten, who has cultivated a distinct public profile, sometimes characterized by her own tendency toward political hyperbole. An impulsive user of Twitter, she has been known to send out the occasional overheated message. During the pandemic, when DeSantis supporters were selling “Don’t Fauci My Florida” merchandise, including beer koozies, on the G.O.P.’s WinRed website, she wrote: “Disgusting. Millions of Floridians are going to die from Ron DeSantis’ ignorance.” She later apologized for the tweet. Two days after returning from winter break in January 2022, with their demands still unmet, the C.T.U. called a strike. “The union isn’t stupid,” Sharkey, who was president at the time, told me. “We knew people were sick of the pandemic.” But, he went on, “for better or for worse we’re a union that strikes. We didn’t think it would be an easy or strategically wise thing, but there was a principle around it. It was something we had to do.”The union already had a contentious relationship with Lightfoot, dating back to an 11-day strike over wages and class sizes in 2019 that ended with the city making major concessions. This time, though, the mayor had public opinion on her side, and she leveraged it in a flurry of media interviews, accusing the C.T.U. of holding Chicago’s children “hostage.” Lightfoot had long seen the A.F.T.’s local as a “political movement” whose ambitions extended well beyond protecting the rights of its workers. “I think, ultimately, they’d like to take over not only Chicago Public Schools, but take over running the city government,” she told The Times in 2021.The 2022 strike quickly became a political nightmare for national Democrats: A Democratic mayor was at war with a Democratic union, shutting down Chicago’s schools at a moment when children were finally back in the classroom and the country was just beginning to confront the learning loss and emotional trauma caused by the pandemic. Splinter groups of teachers in Northern California were also planning sickouts in the face of the Omicron surge. The Chicago strike put Weingarten in a difficult position. Publicly, she supported the C.T.U., while also saying that children needed to be in the classroom. Behind the scenes, she was calling and texting Sharkey constantly, offering to do anything she could — even arrange a call with people at the White House — to help press Lightfoot and end the strike. After a few days, under intensifying public pressure, the C.T.U.’s members voted to return to work. They had lost this battle, but they already had their sights on a bigger one: the city’s upcoming mayoral election.In late October, just before the 2022 midterms, the results from the first full National Assessment of Educational Progress since the start of the pandemic were released, revealing that 40 percent of the country’s eighth-grade public-school students were not proficient in math, and 32 percent were not proficient in reading. The strikingly low scores instantly became a G.O.P. talking point: The culprit wasn’t the pandemic, schools or teachers but the unions and Democratic politicians beholden to them. “We cannot let the nation forget how teachers’ unions tried to hold our children’s futures for ransom,” said Representative Virginia Foxx of North Carolina, then the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce. “These union bosses, and the politicians who enabled them, must be held accountable.” Republicans up and down the ballot accused their Democratic opponents of carrying water for the teachers’ unions. A week before the election, Fox News ran a segment headlined “Have the Teachers Unions Sold Out Your Kids to the Democrats?”Christopher Rufo, the right-wing activist who manufactured the obsession with C.R.T. two years earlier, was now on Fox News railing against another crisis — the “academic queer theory” that he charged was being “mainlined” into America’s public schools — while Republican candidates condemned the “grooming” of children to identify as different genders in the nation’s classrooms. Many Republican candidates pledged their allegiance to a “Parents’ Bill of Rights,” requiring schools to provide information on reading lists, curriculums and whether a family’s child used another name or pronoun in school.The A.F.T. spent in excess of $20 million in the 2022 midterms, more than it ever had in an off-year election, and Weingarten campaigned tirelessly with high-profile Democrats around the country, her arrival on the stump invariably inspiring glee among local Republican leaders. When she appeared in Michigan with Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, one G.O.P. pundit, Kaylee McGhee White, described her on Fox Business Network as “the kiss of death.” Whitmer won easily, as did many other Democrats whose opponents had railed against drag-queen shows for children or L.G.B.T.Q.-themed books in school libraries. But Republican candidates who campaigned on another education issue — school choice — fared much better.As a political matter, all the education battles that had erupted since the start of the pandemic — over school closures, over how the country’s racial history should be taught, over what sort of role parents ought to have in the classroom — were really about the same thing: whether America’s children should continue to be educated in government-run public schools. Did the pandemic and the culture wars reveal the indispensability of these schools to their communities and to the broader fabric of the nation, or did they only underscore their inherent limitations — in effect, making the case for school choice?It was the University of Chicago economist Milton Friedman who first proposed the modern concept of school vouchers in a paper in 1955. Friedman was a champion of free markets, and his idea was to leverage the transformative power of capitalism to prod schools to compete for families’ dollars. But vouchers served another purpose too. The Supreme Court had just ruled on Brown v. Board of Education, and many white Americans were worried about the looming prospect of being forced to send their children to desegregated schools. Friedman saw an opening for his proposal, writing, “Under such a system, there can develop exclusively white schools, exclusively colored schools and mixed schools.”Thirty years later, with Friedman serving as an economic adviser, President Reagan tried repeatedly to introduce federal school-voucher legislation. One of his most vocal opponents was Al Shanker, then the A.F.T.’s president, who argued that choice might be the point of “shopping malls,” but it was not the point of education, nor was it the reason taxpayers were expected to fund the nation’s public schools: “We do so not to satisfy the individual wants of parents and students but because of the public interest in producing an educated citizenry capable of exercising the rights of liberty and being productive members of society.”Even Congress, where Republicans held the Senate majority, considered Reagan’s voucher proposals too radical. But the concept endured. In the 1990s, vouchers were championed by Christian conservatives like Paul Weyrich, a founder of the Heritage Foundation and mentor to Justice Clarence Thomas. Weyrich believed that the nation’s public schools had become “morally decadent institutions” and argued that the only answer was for Christians to educate their children themselves, ideally with government money. Over the years, some states experimented with limited voucher programs, typically designed to target discrete populations like children with special needs. But the pandemic created an opening for voucher advocates to think more ambitiously and move more aggressively. In fact, this had been the plan almost from the very beginning. Two months into the school closures, in the spring of 2020, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the Catholic archbishop of New York, asked DeVos — then the education secretary and a longtime supporter of school choice — in an interview on SiriusXM radio if she intended to “utilize this particular crisis to ensure that justice is finally done to our kids and the parents who choose to send them to faith-based schools.” DeVos answered unequivocally: “Yes, absolutely.”In 2021, at least 18 states created new school-choice programs or expanded existing ones, and more followed suit in 2022. Some of these new programs represent a significant departure from those of the past. Known collectively as universal voucher programs, they are available to everyone and can be applied toward any kind of school. The goal is not merely to disrupt public education but to defund and dismantle it. For years, the country’s lower courts largely agreed that spending taxpayer money on religious schools was unconstitutional. But last summer, the Supreme Court created a new precedent, ruling that it was in fact unconstitutional for voucher programs — in this case, one in rural Maine — to exclude religious schools.Secretary of Education in an indoor seeting, at a White House Coronavirus Task Force press briefing at the U.S. Department of Education in 2020.Alex Wong/Getty ImagesDeVos, now back in the private sector, is one of the leading funders of this new national voucher campaign, primarily through an organization that she helped found called the American Federation for Children. The group and its affiliates spent $9 million on school-choice campaigns in 2022, at least $2.5 million of which came directly from DeVos and her husband. They spent much of this money in the primaries, turning support for school choice into a litmus test and targeting Republican incumbents opposed to it. Three-quarters of the candidates they supported won. “There wasn’t a red wave or a blue wave in the midterms, but there was a school-choice wave,” Corey DeAngelis, a senior fellow at the American Federation for Children, wrote to me in an email. Echoing Weyrich’s sentiments about the moral decadence of American public education, DeAngelis quoted Voddie Baucham, a Christian home-schooling advocate: “We cannot continue to send our children to Caesar for their education and be surprised when they come home as Romans.”DeAngelis identified Weingarten as a useful political foil long before Mike Pompeo. He has been trolling her relentlessly on Twitter since 2021, ostentatiously thanking her for starting “the school choice revolution.” In March, at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in suburban Washington, he posed with a life-size cardboard cutout of her clutching an award labeled “Threat to America’s Children,” his left thumb raised in approval.Lori Lightfoot, the mayor of Chicago, was right about the local teachers’ union’s political ambitions. In February, Brandon Johnson, a former middle-school teacher and paid union organizer, challenged her in the city’s mayoral election. It was a long shot — one early poll put his support at 3 percent — but for the C.T.U., the Johnson campaign was a natural progression. To pursue their broader agenda, which reaches beyond education into areas like housing and policing, they needed the kind of power that can come only from winning partisan political elections. And they had both a powerful grass-roots movement and a source of campaign funds, in the form of members’ dues, that could be leveraged to support Johnson’s candidacy.Johnson’s campaign was underwritten largely by the teachers’ unions. Though the A.F.T. and the C.T.U. had their differences in the past, they have become more closely aligned in recent years. While there are still some divisions within the Democratic Party over education policy, the bipartisan education-reform movement that once posed such a formidable existential threat to the A.F.T. is a shadow of its former self. The threat to the A.F.T. is now partisan, which means that Weingarten is no longer facing as much pressure from centrist Democrats. Backed by the financial and organizational muscle of the national and local teachers’ unions, Johnson knocked Lightfoot out of the two-person runoff, making her the first incumbent mayor in Chicago to be unseated after a single term in 40 years.The Chicago mayoral candidate Brandon Johnson at a rally at the Chicago Teachers Union Foundation in March.John J. Kim, via Getty ImagesBy now, Pompeo, Tim Scott, Marco Rubio, Ron DeSantis, Donald Trump and the rest of the Republican Party were busy elevating education to a central plank in its 2024 platform and in the process transforming Weingarten into the new Hillary — a G.O.P. stand-in for everything that was wrong with America. The Republican-led House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic was continuing to build its case that Weingarten and the A.F.T. exerted undue influence over the C.D.C.’s school-reopening guidelines, summoning Weingarten to appear in Washington on April 26 at a hearing titled “The Consequences of School Closures.”But Weingarten was building her own case. Public education was now itself a hyperpartisan issue, and she addressed it in hyperpartisan terms in a fiery speech at the National Press Club. Calling out by name some of the people who had demonized her since the pandemic, including Betsy DeVos, she described the ongoing effort to defund public schools as nothing less than a threat to “cornerstones of community, of our democracy, our economy and our nation.” She pointed to studies that have shown that vouchers don’t improve student achievement, characterizing them as a back door into private and parochial schools that are not subject to the same federal civil rights laws as public institutions and can therefore promote discrimination. “Our public schools shouldn’t be pawns for politicians’ ambitions!” she thundered, moving toward her emotional conclusion. “They shouldn’t be defunded or destroyed by ideologues.”Like the Virginia’s governor’s race one and a half years earlier, Chicago’s mayoral runoff became, at least in part, a referendum on education. The effects of the pandemic on Chicago’s public schools have been profound. More than 33,000 students have left the school system since the fall of 2020, and the recent National Assessment of Educational Progress scores showed steep declines in math and a widening achievement gap between white and Black students.Brandon Johnson’s opponent, Paul Vallas, ran Chicago’s public schools in the late 1990s. Chicago has no Republican Party to speak of, but Vallas, a vocal proponent of charter schools and vouchers, was the conservative candidate. In 2009, he said he was “more of a Republican than a Democrat.” He was supported by the local business community and endorsed by the city’s police union. A group affiliated with the American Federation for Children spent $60,285 on a pro-Vallas digital media effort. But Arne Duncan and a number of other centrist Democrats endorsed Vallas, too.On the eve of the April runoff election, Weingarten headed to Chicago to speak at a Johnson political rally headlined by Bernie Sanders. Both the A.F.T. and the C.T.U. continued to funnel money into Johnson’s campaign as the election approached, their combined contributions totaling $4.6 million. “All of this stuff is about power,” observed a local community activist, Ja’Mal Green, who had run in the first round of the election but didn’t make the runoff and was now supporting Vallas.When Johnson narrowly won, it was a stunning upset, not just for the candidate but for the left. Even as the Republicans were ramping up their attacks on Weingarten and on the institution of public education, the teachers’ unions had effectively elected the mayor of America’s third-largest city, who was himself an avowedly progressive union organizer promising to raise taxes on the rich, reform the police and increase funding for the city’s schools. Maybe Pompeo hadn’t been wrong, at least as far as his own party was concerned. It was those who had underestimated the political power of the unions who were mistaken. “They said this would never happen,” Johnson said in his victory speech. “If they didn’t know, now they know!”Jonathan Mahler is a staff writer for the magazine. He has written about Donald Trump’s legal accountability, the post-pandemic future of New York City and the state of politics in Wisconsin. More

  • in

    Biden’s Bid for Re-election, and His Age

    More from our inbox:Mr. Lloyd Webber, Don’t Blame Labor UnionsChina and the Population Ponzi Scheme Doug Mills/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Biden Declares 2024 Bid; Possible Rematch in Sight” (front page, April 26):When Joe Biden became the Democratic nominee for president in 2020, I reluctantly gave him my vote. If he is the party’s nominee again in 2024, he will have it again.However, I encourage the president to remember that many who will be voting for him see him not as their preferred choice, but rather the drastically lesser of two evils — and that he should use that knowledge as motivation for action.The uncomfortable truth is that our country is broken and politics as usual will simply no longer suffice.In what will hopefully be his second term, Mr. Biden must use the power of his office to address issues that actually affect everyday Americans: income inequality; food insecurity; reproductive, gender and civil rights; gerrymandering and voter restrictions; gun violence; health care; bloated defense spending; predatory business practices; a radicalized Supreme Court. The list is unfortunately long, and requires that the American people deliver him a Democratic majority in Congress.His first term has shown glimpses that Mr. Biden can be a transformative leader. Now, if given the opportunity of four more years, he must truly commit to his promise of saving the soul of America, for it is battered, bruised and long awaiting its champion.Gabe DowneySouthfield, Mich.To the Editor:President Biden may correctly frame the issue in the 2024 elec­tion as “whether in the years ahead we have more free­dom or less free­dom, more rights or fewer.” But while his as yet unknown opponent cannot be measured against these criteria, we do know that the hallmarks of this administration have been extraordinary exercises in presidential power (often reined in by the courts), an increasingly muscular administrative state and a vast expansion in the size and scope of government.Some may agree with the goals underlying these actions, but they plainly represent the antithesis of “more freedom.”Kenneth A. MargolisChappaqua, N.Y.To the Editor:Re “Biden Should Take Voters’ Concerns About Age Seriously” (editorial, April 23):So what if “Mr. Biden’s overall energy level has declined, and he continues to stumble over words in his public appearances”? He is not running any marathons or competing on “Jeopardy!” The most important trait for a president is sound judgment, and there is no evidence that his judgment is impaired.The main reason that people are concerned about his age is that the media keeps talking about it.Ira D. CohenNorth Bergen, N.J.To the Editor:I am a Democrat who voted for Joe Biden in 2020 and would vote for him again in 2024. Yes, I am concerned about his age and ability, but I, and I think most of the populace, would be a lot less concerned if he had a different running mate.Judith PetrizzoSan Jose, Calif.To the Editor:As one approaching 80 years, but who still actively practices law and carries his own bag on the golf course, I would like to see President Biden as a one-term president. That’s not because I do not like what he has done to date, but because I view him as too old for a second term.Some octogenarians have been luckier than others vis-à-vis their cognitive and physical skills, and should appreciate that luck.While I must concede that I was impressed by Mr. Biden’s recent trip to Ireland and his eloquence before the Irish Parliament, my overall sense is that he’s ebbing. Being president is a taxing, pressure-cooker job that requires a sharp intellect, unless you’re Donald Trump, and great stamina, which I believe neither Mr. Biden nor Mr. Trump possesses.A Biden-Trump rematch would make us a laughingstock. Is this the best we can do?Louis J. MaioneNew YorkTo the Editor:Shame on you, New York Times! Joe Biden at 80 has navigated one of the most divisive and difficult times in our history with dignity and political acumen. To suggest that we throw that away simply because he is older is a capitulation to the current bias against older people.Lisa SerradillaNew YorkMr. Lloyd Webber, Don’t Blame Labor Unions Andrew Kelly/ReutersTo the Editor:Re “Andrew Lloyd Webber: The Closing of ‘Phantom,’ the Loss of My Son and the Future of Broadway” (Opinion guest essay, nytimes.com, April 17):The musicians of New York City join the Broadway theater community in extending heartfelt condolences to Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber following the death of his son. As he stated, there is nothing more tragic for a parent than the death of their child.Mr. Lloyd Webber then turns to the subject of his megahit, “Phantom of the Opera,” which closed on April 16, noting that this past season was the show’s “best ever.”But he then inexplicably pulls out the long disproved cliché about labor unions driving up ticket prices: “The way multiple union contracts drive up the costs of Broadway shows is unsustainable.”This attack on unions is nonsensical. Individual theatrical failures are determined by a variety of factors. Few, if any, of them are attributable to unions.Mr. Lloyd Webber’s theatrical hits helped create the current focus on expensive blockbusters aimed at tourists. Producers mitigate their “risk” by offering safer, already branded projects that might hopefully recoup any Broadway losses when they perform on the road. This is very dissimilar to the Stephen Sondheim/Hal Prince classics he praises.“Phantom of the Opera” generated 35 years of financial security for Mr. Lloyd Webber, his investors and thousands of union workers who were fortunate enough to bring it to life. More important, the show brought pleasure to audiences all over the world. That kind of success cannot be replicated by simply cutting wages.Tino GagliardiNew YorkThe writer is president of the New York City musicians’ union (American Federation of Musicians Local 802).China and the Population Ponzi SchemeA family cradling their child at a park in Beijing. China’s death rate surpassed its birth rate for the first time in decades this year.Gilles Sabrie for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Shrinking Population in China Affects All” (news article, April 20):No doubt, China’s shrinking population will create economic challenges that will require creative solutions. But aren’t economic challenges preferable to the environmental ones China would face if its population continued growing well past its current 1.4 billion?To declare it a crisis that China will have fewer people to manufacture the products (including the useless junk) that we in the Western world consume at unsustainable levels is to ignore the fact that we live on a planet that is being smothered to death by our plastic trash.To fret over diminishing demand for ugly high-rise apartment buildings is to imply that we should keep sprawling, replacing nature with buildings, roads and utilities, wildlife habitats be damned.Financial security at the individual level doesn’t necessarily require a growing G.D.P. or a growing population. When women have fewer children, they spend more time in the paid work force; they also tend to have healthier, better educated children who grow up to be more productive adults. We should enthusiastically embrace ending the population Ponzi scheme.Marian StarkeyFalmouth, MaineThe writer is vice president for communications at Population Connection. More

  • in

    Democratic Convention Gives Chicago, Staggered by Pandemic, a Chance to Shine

    Republicans have cast Chicago as a metropolis of crime and dysfunction, but with the 2024 Democratic convention, Chicagoans are eager to prove them wrong.CHICAGO — Word had just leaked Tuesday that the Democratic Party had chosen the nation’s third-largest city for its 2024 national convention when Republicans began trotting out warnings about crime infestations and the necessity of bulletproof vests.But no political trash talk seemed to dampen the excitement of a metropolis less in need of a pick-me-up than a little validation for the comeback it is sure is coming.“It’s definitely a shot in the arm to the city,” said Sam Toia, a longtime Chicago booster and the president of the Illinois Restaurant Association, adding, “We are a world-class city,” an oft-used phrase here that projects Chicagoans’ time-honored self-doubt.It would be dishonest to say Chicago, which last hosted the Democratic convention in 1996, has recovered all of its swagger since the coronavirus laid it low. Then-President Donald J. Trump was already denouncing Chicago as some sort of national embarrassment even before the virus reached American shores. Its violent crime, though receding from its post-pandemic high by some measures, is still “a cancer that’s eating the soul of this city,” said Arne Duncan, a former secretary of education whose new venture addresses violence in Chicago’s worst neighborhoods.Hotel and retail traffic is back to 85 percent of 2019 levels while public transit is at 73 percent, according to the Chicago Loop Alliance. But Chicago’s downtown late last year was only at half the activity it hosted before the pandemic, 48th among the 62 North American cities the University of Toronto measured.Brandon Johnson campaigning with supporters in February in Chicago, before his eventual victory.Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York TimesThe surprise mayoral triumph last week of a young, untested liberal, Brandon Johnson, has brought with it a nervous excitement — the hope of a fresh face but the worry that comes with inexperience. Still, with the sun out, temperatures in the 70s and the summer festival season on its way, Chicagoans were already feeling optimistic. “It gives us an opportunity to feature the best of the best, in a space where there is a lot of energy and a lot of hope,” said Representative Delia Ramirez, a progressive in her first term in Congress from Chicago’s near northwest side. “This is a truly new day, with a brand-new mayor-elect, the youngest, most progressive, most diverse City Council ever, our first Latina in Congress — it’s a magical place and it’s ready.”Chicago beat out its biggest competitor, Atlanta, with three basic appeals. It’s in a state with a Democratic governor, J.B. Pritzker, who also happens to be a billionaire with deep and wide-open pockets. It has powerful unions who pressed the pro-labor occupant of the White House to choose a city with unionized hotels, unionized convention and entertainment sites and unionized restaurants. And it’s in a state whose progressive policies contrasted sharply with Georgia’s abortion ban, open-carry gun law and “right-to-work” labor requirements.Chicago’s proximity to the “Blue Wall” states that President Biden will need for his re-election — Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania — may have been a factor, but Georgia is no less important a swing state in 2024. The people who made the pitch were far more intent on emphasizing that no conventioneers would have to cross picket lines to crawl into their nonunion hotel beds or deal with openly armed protesters.“Illinois really does represent the values of the Democratic Party, from A to Z, especially the labor piece,” said Bob Reiter, president of the Chicago Federation of Labor.Mr. Johnson’s victory was something of a bonus, along with the landslide election last week of a liberal judge to Wisconsin’s state Supreme Court, just to the north.“Chicago had the clear advantage of a Democratic governor, a governor who was intimately involved in the bid and also a political race where a progressive Democrat just won a really tough race,” said Shirley Franklin, a former Atlanta mayor who was part of the public campaign to bring the convention to the South.Had Mr. Johnson’s much more conservative rival, Paul Vallas, prevailed, Democratic Party officials would have had to figure out how — or whether — to embrace a mayor whom many of them had spent months painting as a secret Republican who used fear tactics and crime to garner support from Chicago-area Republicans.Gov. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois was instrumental in bringing the Democrats’ convention to Chicago.Evan Jenkins for The New York TimesThe city’s liberal leaders hope convention organizers will elevate Mr. Johnson, as they try to energize young voters who have been supercharged by issues like abortion and guns but have not quite warmed to their octogenarian president.“Democrats need to show that we have people on the mic, front and center, that excite people, that unite people and give them hope that we can come together,” Ms. Ramirez said.Party officials are unsure what role the new mayor might play at the convention. Mr. Johnson may not have all the internal party baggage that Mr. Vallas had, but he did openly discuss “defunding” the police during the civil rights protests that followed the murder of George Floyd. More than a year before the actual convention, Republicans are already latching onto Chicago’s reputation for criminal violence and political dysfunction.“What’s the bigger concern, sirens drowning out nominating speeches or what items attendees must leave at home to make room for their bulletproof vest in their suitcase?” quipped Will Reinert, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee.The right-wing website Breitbart blared, “Democrats Choose Chicago, America’s Murder Capital.”Jeffrey Blehar, a Chicago-based contributor for the conservative National Review, predicted, “Democratic conventioneers are in for an entirely new experience in either highly militarized downtown security or exciting street-crime adventure.”If, by the summer of 2024, crime rates are improving and Chicago’s police force is amply funded, Mr. Johnson may well be center stage. If trends go otherwise, he may not be.What is clear, city boosters say, is that Chicago will be ready, with Michelin-starred restaurants within walking distance of the arena, gracious hotels scrubbed of their pandemic dust and city residents eager to prove their detractors wrong.“Are there things we need to snap into place post-pandemic? Sure,” Mr. Reiter said. “This event helps us clinch that.” Maya King More

  • in

    5 Reasons Democrats Picked Chicago for Their 2024 Convention

    Party leaders said the choice reflected their momentum in the Midwest. But the political map was only one factor behind the decision.President Biden’s decision to host the Democratic National Convention in Chicago represents the triumph of practicality over sentimentality.He picked a major Midwestern city with ample labor-friendly hotels, good transportation and a billionaire governor happy to underwrite the event. That combination overpowered the pull Biden felt from runner-up Atlanta, the capital of a state Mr. Biden won for Democrats in 2020 for the first time in a generation.Chicago — unlike the last four Democratic convention cities — is not in a presidential battleground. But it is the cultural and economic capital of the American Midwest. The United Center, the convention arena, sits about an hour away from two critical presidential battleground states, Wisconsin and Michigan, with sometimes-competitive Minnesota nearby.Democrats used the choice to highlight their commitment to protecting the “blue wall” of Midwestern states that have been critical to their White House victories. But the electoral map wasn’t the only factor. Here are the top reasons Chicago was selected.Last week, Chicago elected Brandon Johnson, a progressive Democrat, as the new mayor.Evan Cobb for The New York TimesLaborMr. Biden said during his first year in office that he would be “the most pro-union president leading the most pro-union administration in American history.”So it would have been politically tricky at best for him to send a national political convention to Atlanta, a city with comparatively few unionized hotels in a so-called right-to-work state.An Atlanta convention could have prompted organized labor to limit its financial contributions, or even orchestrate outright boycotts. When President Barack Obama took the Democratic convention to Charlotte in 2012, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers skipped the event.“Some of our labor members have felt that they’ve been left behind,” said Lonnie Stephenson, who retired as president of the I.B.E.W. last year. “I think this shows the commitment of the Democratic Party to support that part of the country.”Money and J.B. PritzkerConventions are expensive and the money to pay for them can be hard to come by. The nominee does not want to divert dollars for campaigning in battleground states to an elaborate party. And the Democratic base is increasingly hostile to many of the large corporations that have historically underwritten conventions.Enter J.B. Pritzker, the Democratic governor of Illinois, a billionaire who also happens to have been a former top party fund-raiser.“We have a very generous local bunch of corporate leaders and corporations in the Fortune 500,” Gov. J.B. Pritzker said.Evan Jenkins for The New York TimesMr. Pritzker was central to Chicago’s bid. He personally lobbied Mr. Biden. And before the announcement Tuesday, he privately pledged fund-raising for the convention, which is a relief to party officials..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.“We have a very generous local bunch of corporate leaders and corporations in the Fortune 500,” Mr. Pritzker said in an interview on Tuesday. “I’m, of course, personally committed to engage in the fund-raising that’s necessary.”Implicit in that promise is that Mr. Pritzker, who spent more than $300 million on his two campaigns for governor, will serve as a financial backstop if outside money does not materialize.Political geographyDemocrats were quick to talk about other factors. They held up the selection of Chicago as a symbol of the party’s investment in the Midwest, and the central role the region will play in Mr. Biden’s path to victory in 2024.“The Midwest reflects America,” said Jaime Harrison, the party chairman.Republicans had the same idea. They announced last August that their convention would be in Milwaukee in July 2024, meaning that the two conventions will be within driving distance. (The Democrats will meet in August.)But the reality is that the political implications for the host city and state are often overblown.Democrats hosted in North Carolina (2012) and Pennsylvania (2016), and still lost those states. Republicans hosted in Minnesota (2008) and Florida (2012), and lost both times. And in 2016, Republicans hosted Donald J. Trump’s nominating convention in Cleveland but the event divided the party’s Ohio leadership. The Republican governor, John Kasich, and its senator, Rob Portman, largely stayed away, then Republicans went on to win the state anyway.Still, the decision stung in Georgia, where Democrats had made a strong political case for hosting.Mayor Andre Dickens of Atlanta called Georgia “the battleground that will decide the 2024 election.”And Erick Allen, a former state representative who is the party chairman in suburban Cobb County, said Democrats were making a mistake.“I think they got it wrong,” he said. “There’s an opportunity to use the convention in Atlanta as a regional win for the Democratic Party. And I think that’s now going to be harder.”Logistics, logistics, logisticsConventions are international events that require tens of thousands of hotel rooms and a transportation and law enforcement network that can involve dozens of local, state and federal agencies.Chicago here had an advantage in the number of hotel rooms, 44,000, within a reasonable distance of the convention site, along with a public transit network that has three train lines that have stops within a few blocks of the arena.“The bottom line is Chicago can hold a convention of this size in a very centrally located, easy to get around way,” said Senator Tammy Duckworth, an Illinois Democrat.More compelling to the Democratic National Committee was the fact that Chicago’s United Center sits on a plot of 45 acres of privately owned land, making it easier to secure and control activities outside. The arena also has twice as many suites as Atlanta’s State Farm Arena, which would have hosted the convention there. Those suites will serve as magnets for the party’s high-dollar donors.Crime and local politicsIt’s pretty clear how Republicans will portray Mr. Biden’s convention city.A spokesman for the campaign arm of House Republicans, Will Reinert, mocked the selection: “What’s the bigger concern: sirens drowning out nominating speeches or what items attendees must leave at home to make room for their bulletproof vest in their suitcase?”(Republicans notably did not mention crime rates when they selected Milwaukee, which had a higher homicide rate than Chicago in 2022.) Democrats answered that pandemic-era spikes in crime were easing, in Chicago and across the country. As a political issue, the tough-on-crime messaging may also be losing its power. The city this month elected a new mayor, Brandon Johnson, who defeated a more conservative rival backed by the local police unions who focused his campaign on the issue of addressing the city’s crime.“The truth is that things have gotten better and better,” Mr. Pritzker said. “It’s a recovery across the nation in major cities that includes a recovery on the issue of crime. Things are better than they were.”Maya King More

  • in

    United Auto Workers Usher In New Era of Leadership

    Shawn Fain, who ousted the incumbent president, is presiding over a convention to chart the union’s approach in contract talks this year.The United Auto Workers union has opened a new chapter in its storied history, and it may end up looking a lot like its combative past.Over the weekend, the 88-year-old union confirmed that an outsider, Shawn Fain, had prevailed in a hotly contested election for president, ousting the incumbent. An electrician whose father and grandfathers were also U.A.W. members, Mr. Fain has promised to take a tough negotiating line for increased wages in contract talks this year with the three Detroit automakers.“It is a new day for the U.A.W.,” Mr. Fain said on Monday at the start of a three-day convention, where hundreds of delegates will hammer out priorities and strategies for the contract talks that will formally open this summer.“We are here to come together for the war against our one and only true enemy — the multibillion-dollar corporations and employers who refuse to give our members their fair share,” Mr. Fain said.He opened his address by shouting, “Let’s get ready to rumble!” — drawing out the final word in the style of the famed boxing ring announcer Michael Buffer.Mr. Fain, 54, won by a razor-thin margin after prolonged vote-counting and more than two weeks of wrangling over some 1,600 challenged ballots. With the count nearly complete, Mr. Fain had 69,459 votes — 483 more than the incumbent, Ray Curry. Mr. Fain was declared the victor, and Mr. Curry conceded, when the margin exceeded the number of ballots still under challenge.The election was the first in the U.A.W.’s history in which the president and the union’s other senior executives were chosen through direct balloting of members. In the past, the leadership was chosen by delegates, a system in which favors and favoritism played a heavy role.T-shirts on display at the convention showed support for the union faction led by Mr. Fain. Rebecca Cook/ReutersThe democratic election had been mandated by a court-appointed monitor who has been overseeing the U.A.W.’s efforts to carry out anti-corruption reforms. The monitor was appointed as part of a 2021 settlement of a federal investigation that found that top union officials had embezzled more than $1.5 million from membership dues and $3.5 million from training centers, and had spent some of the money on expensive cigars, wines, liquor, golf clubs, apparel and luxury travel. More than a dozen U.A.W. officials, including two former presidents, pleaded guilty.Mr. Curry was not a target of the corruption investigation but many members saw him as linked to the establishment that had been running the union for years.Mr. Fain takes office along with several other outsiders running on his slate who were elected to senior posts by convincing margins. They won support from members who were angered over the corruption scandals and wanted an executive team that would push harder for higher wages and other demands in contract talks with General Motors, Ford Motor and Stellantis, the automaker formed through the merger of Fiat Chrysler and Peugeot S.A.Decades ago, the U.A.W. had more than 1.5 million members and the power to influence presidential elections and demand steady increases in wages and benefits. When the manufacturers resisted, it called strikes that shut down a large part of the industry. Over the years, the U.A.W.’s gains helped lift wages and living standards for a broad swath of manufacturing workers across the United States.But its influence declined as the Detroit automakers struggled. When G.M. and Chrysler were reorganized in bankruptcy court in 2009, the union made concessions on wages and benefits that it has not won back, and it has had to weather the closing of dozens of plants. It now has about 400,000 members.The contract talks come after years in which G.M., Ford and Stellantis have been reporting record results and have paid significant sums to workers in profit-sharing bonuses. In 2022, for example, G.M. made a profit of $9.9 billion and paid a bonus of $12,750 to each of its U.A.W. workers.Members want Mr. Fain to fight for wage increases to offset inflation, an end to a two-tier wage system that pays newer workers significantly less than veterans and assurances that new plants will be built in the United States rather than abroad.At the convention, the rank and file appeared to back Mr. Fain, despite his narrow margin of victory.“I’m ready to strike,” said Romaine McKinney III, an electrician at a Stellantis stamping plant in Warren, Mich. “We have to show these companies that we are ready to walk out.”Jamonty Washington, a worker at a Detroit plant where Stellantis makes Jeeps, said he started his job 12 years ago making just under $16 an hour — working next to a colleague making $31 an hour. He has worked his way up to $30 an hour, he said, but thinks the union has to fight to eliminate such differences in pay.“Equal pay for equal work,” he said. “It’s time for this union to get back to being militant — not asking but demanding.” More

  • in

    Chicago’s Mayoral Race Pits the Teachers Union Against the Police Union

    In a city known for its unions, two loom over the Paul Vallas-Brandon Johnson race, and no labor leader is as significant as the incendiary president of the Fraternal Order of Police.CHICAGO — When Bobby L. Rush, the Black Panther turned congressman turned elder statesman of this city’s South Side, stood last week to endorse Paul Vallas for mayor, the first question he confronted featured his own words.How could a man who just two and a half years ago called Chicago’s Fraternal Order of Police “the most rabid, racist body of criminal lawlessness by police in the land” stand behind Mr. Vallas, the candidate endorsed by that police union?“I have no patience for their leadership,” whom “I detest,” Mr. Rush said, thronged by supporters with Mr. Vallas by his side. But, he added, “I had my son killed by street violence. I cannot be antipolice.”In a city where organized labor remains a powerful symbolic and organizational force, two unions have loomed over the race for Chicago mayor, which ends with a fiercely contested runoff election on April 4: Chicago’s Lodge 7 of the Fraternal Order of Police, which backs the more conservative Democrat in the race, Mr. Vallas, and the Chicago Teachers Union, which backs the Cook County commissioner Brandon Johnson, a C.T.U. member and former teacher.Both unions offer considerable muscle, which could prove vital if turnout remains around the 36 percent who came out for the first round of voting on Feb. 28. The teachers union has put $1.2 million behind Mr. Johnson, with a further $1 million coming from the national and Illinois federations of teachers. Armies of door knockers and phone bankers are pitching in, while the police union presses its members to volunteer for the final Vallas sprint.But no other union in the nation’s third-largest city carries the same liabilities either. An 11-day teachers strike near the beginning of the 2019 school year pitted the educators’ union against City Hall and many parents. Then schools shut again last year with the teachers union again at loggerheads with the city, this time over coronavirus policies as parents prepared to send their children back to in-person instruction.John Catanzara, president of Chicago’s Lodge 7 of the Fraternal Order of Police, which has backed Mr. Vallas. Mr. Johnson’s campaign has tried to tie Mr. Vallas’s tough-on-crime talk to the incendiary views of Mr. Catanzara.Ashlee Rezin/Chicago Sun-Times, via Associated PressStill, there is nothing quite like Chicago’s relationship with the Fraternal Order of Police, especially with its president, John Catanzara, who expressed sympathies for the rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, called Muslims “savages” who “all deserve a bullet” and retired from the police force in 2021 rather than face potential disciplinary actions. He punctuated his retirement papers with a handwritten note, “Finally!!! Let’s go Brandon,” a stand-in phrase for a more vulgar insult against President Biden.“When they talk about the F.O.P., they’re talking about me, which is hilarious,” Mr. Catanzara said in an interview, conceding, “If I got paid a dollar every time I was called a racist, I’d be an independently wealthy man.”In a mayoral campaign that has revolved around the two candidates’ very different stances on policing and public safety, Mr. Johnson’s campaign has tried to tie Mr. Vallas’s tough-on-crime talk to the incendiary views of Mr. Catanzara. One recent flier aimed at Latino neighborhoods compared Mr. Johnson’s promises — “Brandon will train and promote 200 new detectives” — to a single aspect of Mr. Vallas’s public safety record: “Vallas is endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police.”Mr. Catanzara’s Facebook post about Muslims has been a talking point in the multicultural quarters of this racially, ethnically and religiously diverse metropolis. And Johnson campaign workers are quick to link Mr. Vallas to the extended comments that Mr. Catanzara made to a Chicago public radio reporter about the Capitol rioters, which included, “There was no arson, there was no burning of anything, there was no looting, there was very little destruction of property. It was a bunch of pissed-off people that feel an election was stolen, somehow, some way.”Mr. Rush’s endorsement of Mr. Vallas, a potential boost for the white candidate facing skepticism among some Black voters, elicited reminders from the Johnson campaign of an interview in Politico where Mr. Rush said the police union “stands shoulder to shoulder with the Ku Klux Klan.”The broader aim is to convince Chicagoans that Mr. Vallas is some kind of secret Republican in a city dominated by Democrats. Linking him with Mr. Catanzara, an outspoken supporter of former President Donald J. Trump, is a key to that strategy, Johnson campaign aides said. Mr. Johnson did not have to name names during a debate last Tuesday night when he accused his opponent of hanging out with people in the “extreme Republican Party who did not believe the pandemic was real.” (Mr. Catanzara urged police officers in 2021 to defy the city’s vaccine mandate.)Paul Vallas speaks to supporters after advancing to the April runoff last month.Taylor Glascock for The New York TimesLittle wonder that Mr. Rush, who retired from the House last year, spent his initial comments on Tuesday vouching for Mr. Vallas as “a lifelong Democrat” and a “South Side Democrat” who “ain’t nothing but a Democrat.”In Chicago, unions stretch well beyond teachers and police, and organized labor — facing two starkly different candidates in a contest that has already sunk the incumbent mayor, Lori Lightfoot — is as divided as the city itself. Local 150 of the International Union of Operating Engineers has backed Mr. Vallas after its preferred candidate, Representative Jesús G. García, failed to make the runoff. So have union locals representing firefighters, ironworkers, elevator constructors, plumbers and electricians.Beyond the teachers unions, Mr. Johnson’s union backers include service workers, nurses and government employees.But Mr. Catanzara is a presence like none other, so much so that Mr. Vallas has made a show of not taking money from the Fraternal Order of Police or accepting any formal organizing muscle. When Ja’Mal Green, a 27-year-old activist who tried and failed to make the mayoral runoff, surprised the city by endorsing Mr. Vallas, he made a point of posting a video pressing his chosen candidate to say he is not beholden to the police union.“I’m not beholden to anybody,” Mr. Vallas responded.Mr. Catanzara is not lying low. He predicted that 800 to 1,000 Chicago police officers would leave the force if Mr. Johnson wins, adding to hundreds of vacancies already awaiting the next mayor.“If this guy gets in we’re going to see an exodus like we’ve never seen before,” he said, predicting “blood in the streets.”Mr. Catanzara was particularly hard on the teachers union and its “Manchurian candidate.”“They’re definitely pushing all their chips into the pot here,” he said.As for those who cast him as a bigoted bomb thrower, Mr. Catanzara just waved his hands. “I don’t waste my breath with them,” he said. “Like I tell everyone, read the book, not the cover.”Brandon Johnson, the Cook County commissioner, is a former teacher and member of the Chicago Teachers Union, which has endorsed him.Jim Vondruska for The New York TimesHis presence is especially troubling for Black Chicagoans, who must balance their concern over violent crime against their troubles with a police department that has been laboring under a federal consent decree after the Justice Department found routine use of excessive force. Mr. Johnson is Black. Mr. Vallas is white. And race has been a dividing line in Chicago politics since the city elected its first Black mayor, Harold Washington, in 1983.Last week, Paris Walker and her sister Emma gathered with others in Chicago’s historic Bronzeville neighborhood to march with Mr. Vallas and Mr. Rush to the storefront Beloved Community Church of God in Christ, where the former congressman was to bestow his blessing. Paris Walker shrugged off Mr. Vallas’s ties to the police union and said Mr. Johnson lacked the experience to run a city of Chicago’s size and complexity.Emma Walker was not as sure as she recounted menacing traffic stops, unwarranted violence and general intimidation from the Chicago police.“It bothers me,” she said of Mr. Vallas’s police union ties. “The police need a lot of cleaning up.” More