Time to push congestion pricing to the end
here we go again. The local New York media is full of absurd, unproven theories designed to charge a fee to use the scarce and congested streets south of 60th Street in Manhattan, and use the cash to subsidize public transportation. Like clockwork, petty politicians from Brooklyn, Queens, New Jersey and the Bronx have complained about “attacks” on working New Yorkers. Big Era Politicians Lead the Charge: New Jersey Governor Talks ‘Double Taxation’ Untested concepts are accepted as fact, and there are concerns that drivers will take up parking spaces north of 60th Street. Perhaps most absurd is the idea that congestion charging is a regressive tax. Here’s a news flash: Nearly everyone who drives into town is someone senior enough in their organization to get subsidized parking, or have enough money to pay for parking.as I wrote about congestion charging in my article This June:
“Years ago, community service association The impact of congestion charging on allocation was studied and found:
“…Only 4% of outer-city working residents commute to Manhattan for work by car and may be subject to congestion charges. This compares to 56% of outer-city residents who use public transit to commute to work in Manhattan…”
Funding designs that reduce traffic and provide additional funding for public transit will redistribute the wealth of the rich to benefit working-class commuters. Making public transport more attractive has wide-ranging positive environmental, social and economic impacts. As New York City reopens, we need to charge for motor vehicles that use crowded street space. In fact, instead of building more streets in Manhattan, we’re trying to drive more vehicles on those streets. Traffic is scary again, and we need to find ways to encourage people to get out of their cars and take the subway. “
It’s time to wrap up the debate on whether to enforce New York State laws enacted a few years ago and move on to how much to charge car drivers, delivery vans and trucks, and the hours of the day when charges can be reduced to encourage overnight truck deliveries and other possible reductions traffic practices. New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy’s self-serving political pandering is over, and the days of pandering Phil to show some leadership are long gone. No, Governor, when you charge bridge and tunnel tolls plus congestion charges, it’s not “double taxation.” This is the fee for the second service. Stay away from crowded areas and you won’t be charged. Why have we never heard you complain about a tax of over 10% on the city’s already expensive parking fees? Why didn’t you complain when Jerseys paid for George Washington and the Throgs Neck bridge to go to Long Island? There is no obvious political basis for farming, is there? A true leader would encourage his residents to do what 96% of New Yorkers do: take public transit into Manhattan! Murphy probably wouldn’t bother to advocate for public transport, since most Jerseys already use it.According to an article by Dave Colon StreetsBlog NYC in October 2021:
“New Jersey commuters who drive into the so-called Manhattan central business district include a small group of wealthy individuals, according to Census data collected by Tri-State Transportation Campaign and released Monday — a scathing rebuke of New Jersey politicians who claim congestion charging is an unfair tax on the hard-working middle class. Transit pro-transit groups looked at commuting patterns in the Garden State’s 21 legislative districts closest to Manhattan and found that, on average, only 1.6 percent of commuters in those districts drive to the CBD for work — those who earn a median income of 107,996 commuters per year dollars, about 22 percent higher than the median of $88,407 for commuters who use public transportation. In short, the number of New Jersey drivers using the Holland or Lincoln Tunnel or the George Washington Bridge to get below 60th Street in Manhattan is small, but the wallet is big. ”
Murphy isn’t alone, and he’s adamantly against congestion pricing. Various local politicians found they could get some free media by opposing the charge. Of course, Murphy is the only one who threatens to destroy the Port Authority. And is the only one capable of following up on this deeply self-destructive threat. Murphy and his anti-toll colleagues are reinforcing the anti-tax ideology popularized by Ronald Reagan and now ingrained in the population. In this view, all taxes are bad, and as a result, bridges collapse, water systems fail, and American infrastructure sometimes looks like it belongs to a developing country. Congestion pricing is effectively a tax on the transportation of the wealthy to subsidize the transportation used by workers. Phil, you have to realize that you are against a tax that is borne primarily by the wealthy. You must be aware that you are against tax funding of woefully underfunded infrastructure. It’s all for the political game. Support the anti-tax ideology that freezes our unjust and inadequate tax system. shame on you.
The logic of congestion charges is irrefutable. Traffic in lower midtown Manhattan makes walking faster than driving. Fees can be adjusted based on price and time of day to reduce the time it takes to move on the ground. At the same time, it will bring a critical and much-needed revenue stream to Metro. Even if all of our vehicles are electric, public transportation is still the most resource-efficient mode of transportation. When someone brings a vehicle into Lower Manhattan, they increase the time it takes for people and goods to move, increasing the cost of doing business in New York. Tolls are a reasonable way to recover some of the cost and invest it in a mode of transportation that reduces street traffic.
Additionally, some fairness issues can be easily addressed by allowing targeted fee waivers. Temporary or permanent exemptions are available for people who visit a doctor for medical treatment and people with limited mobility. Some exemptions are written into the law. Other difficult situations may arise and can be handled. Even harder to deal with are the shameless politicians who should know better but believe there is a political interest in the emergence of anti-congestion charges. In fact, in lower Manhattan, more Jerseys take the subway than drive. They will also benefit from improved public transport. A responsible elected leader can point this out and stop pandering to anti-tax fanatics.
Congestion pricing was first proposed by then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2007 and enacted into law by the New York State Legislature in 2019. It has been 15 years since its formulation and 3 years since its promulgation, but it is still not in place.
Ironically, the concept of congestion charging was first invented by Columbia University economist William Vickery for the New York subway in 1952 as a way to reduce congestion. Four days before his death in 1996, it took the world only 44 years to recognize his genius and award him the Nobel Prize in Economics. So, in a sense, it’s a policy that’s been 70 years in the making. It would be tragic if the public, driven by misinformation, disinformation, and outrageous political propaganda, were allowed to delay this initiative further.
Our national politics is full of ideology and idiots, but I’ve always believed that action, not fantasy, ultimately dominates most local issues. Airlines often use congestion pricing to price and allocate seats, and businesses have long known its usefulness for maximizing utilization and reducing waste. We are about to implement it. All we need is a little political courage to push it across the finish line. I wonder why this makes me nervous…
