Paul Steely White

Are There Better and Fairer Alternatives to Congestion Pricing?

To raise $400 million per year to fund a new generation of necessary transit improvements and to reduce the skyrocketing health[pdf], quality of life, environmental and business costs of traffic congestion, Mayor Michael Bloomberg is pursuing a plan for London style congestion pricing.

Opponents of the plan have said recently that they have two better ways to solve New York City's transportation problems: improving traffic enforcement and reducing truck traffic. While these proposals have merit (and are in fact already a part of the Mayor's larger transportation plan, they would not raise any money for necessary subway and bus system expansions and would have only a small impact on traffic congestion. Trucks represent less than 10% of traffic, and no amount of enforcement is going to change the fact that there are simply too many drivers clogging our streets, polluting our air and making life miserable for everyone.

Opponents of the Mayor's plan have gotten a bit more traction with their argument that the plan is "unfair" to the working class. But again, the facts tell a different story. Only 5% of workers drive into Manhattan (the rest take transit or drive elsewhere) and these drivers, compared to subway and bus riders, earn substantially more income. [Source: 2000 Census]

Congestion pricing is not everything to everyone, but it is more than fair to the majority of low and middle income New Yorkers who are literally sick from traffic and tired of poor quality transit. This is why a growing coalition of over 80 labor, business health and community groups has come out in support of the Mayor's plan.

Paul Steely White: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 7:41 AM, May 15, 2007 in Cities | Environmental Justice | New York | Transportation
Permalink | Email to Friend