New York’s congestion pricing plan inspired transit advocates nationwide. Now what?
Governor Kathy Hochul of New York earned herself a profile in cowardice on Wednesday when she indefinitely “paused” New York City’s pioneering congestion pricing plan. New York Governor Kathy Hochul has indefinitely halted the implementation of a congestion pricing plan, which would have charged drivers $15 to enter some parts of Manhattan, with the proceeds going to mass transit. The plan was intended to be a national model for mass transit and was already inspiring officials in other cities, including Boston, to consider the idea. However, the decision to abandon the plan was met with criticism from both pro-transit and environmental advocates. Critics compared it to former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's decision to cancel new train tunnels under the Hudson. Hachul defended the plan as recently as a few weeks ago, but now appears to have decided not to defend it.
gepubliceerd : 3 weken geleden door Alan Wirzbicki in Environment
Years of work have gone into the system, which would have charged drivers $15 to enter some parts of Manhattan, with the proceeds going to mass transit, and it was poised to be a national model. Congestion pricing is a way of paying for transit, managing traffic, and improving air quality all at the same time . Even in its planning stage, New York’s system was already inspiring officials in other cities, including Boston , to look at the idea. (A Globe op-ed from February urged Boston to adopt congestion pricing.)
Governor Kathy Hochul of New York earned herself a profile in cowardice on Wednesday when she indefinitely “paused” New York City’s pioneering congestion pricing plan.
Hochul said she stopped the plan because of concerns about its impact on New York’s post-pandemic economic recovery. There were indeed some principled objections to congestion pricing, but nobody believes that’s really why Hochul — who had defended the plan as recently as a few weeks ago — scuppered the idea.
She just got cold feet.
From pro-transit and environmental advocates — and many others — the reaction was furious. If New York’s previous embrace of congestion pricing helped raise the idea’s profile in the United States, Hochul’s U-turn last week threatens to undermine it.
The Guardian rounded up the negative reaction — a “slap in the face”; “disastrous”'; “reckless” — and local commentators weighed in.
Writing in The New York Times, Tom Wright and Kate Slevin directly compared her move to former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s 2010 decision to cancel new train tunnels under the Hudson — “short-term choices that pushed aside critical long-term investments in the most mass-transit-dependent metropolitan area of the nation.”
In the Daily News, Alex Matthiessen decried it as a “betrayal.”
Nicole Gelinas, a contributing editor to the right-of-center Manhattan Institute’s City Journal, lamented the apparent demise of congestion pricing and called for Hochul to salvage something from all the money spent on the project with a more limited pilot project.
Josh Barro, who also supports congestion pricing, traced its unpopularity to public skepticism that the money would be well spent.
As a concept, congestion pricing has support across ideological lines. Economists tend to love it — and so do environmentalists.
But like a lot of ideas beloved by technocrats, congestion pricing was a hard sell to the public. And Hochul apparently concluded it was beyond her political abilities to defend it.
This is an excerpt from Are we there yet?, a Globe Opinion newsletter about the future of transportation in the region. Sign up to get it in your inbox a day early.
Alan Wirzbicki is Globe deputy editor for editorials. He can be reached at [email protected].