In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

I'm curious how congestion pricing became a national issue. The strength of conviction people have about this policy–almost either way, but certainly among those against–seems to scale with distance from the city.

Nobody in Idaho gets uppity about New Jersey's tolls. But they have strong, knowledge-free, almost identity-defining opinions about congestion charges.

Is it because it's a policy that's worked in Europe and Asia and is thus seen as foreign? Or because it's New York doing it, so it's branded as a tax, versus market-rate access or whatever we'd be calling it if this were done in Miami?

I think it's because it disproportionately impacts the people who can least afford it. It allows the wealthy to continue to enjoy the convenience (relative to alternatives) of driving into the city while polluting and causing traffic at a price that has zero impact on their lives while it punishes those who already have much less and whose lives will be impacted by the fines and the often significant amounts of time they'll have to spend arranging and taking alternative modes of transportation.

That's a very hard sell when people all around the country are feeling continuous downward pressure on their lifestyle and financial security while billionaires are seen getting massive tax breaks and pillaging everything they want while escaping accountability for the harms they cause everyone else. Taking a basic task like driving into the city, something many people are forced to do for work, and punishing them for it while once again giving the wealthy a pass was certain to upset people. in fact, by forcing more of the peasant class off the roads it makes driving into the city much more pleasant for the people with enough money to not care about the extra expense. Taking from the poor to improve things for the wealthy resonates with a lot of people.

It also doesn't help that in other contexts, congestion pricing has already hit people's wallets and is seen as an exploitative business model designed to extract as much money from the public as possible. The last thing most people want is seeing congestion pricing and other price-fuckery infesting another aspect of their daily lives, which is why the pushback against wendy's implementing it was so swift and severe that the company had to backpedal even after spending a small fortune on the digital menu boards they needed to enable it.

I think this comment is a great example of what the OP is talking about. Your comment is completely divorced from the context of congestion pricing in New York City. For example:

> Taking a basic task like driving into the city, something many people are forced to do for work

That is simply not the case in NYC. Very, very few people must drive into the center of Manhattan to work. It was already unaffordable to do so anyway because parking is incredibly expensive. People take the subway. Car ownership is already disproportionately preserved for the rich.

NYC is different from much of the country. I'm not going to make an argument that it's any better or any worse, but it is different. NYC congestion pricing as a national debate is missing the forest for the trees.

> Very, very few people must drive into the center of Manhattan to work.

I assure you that Manhattan is filled with many employees and service workers.

> It was already unaffordable to do so anyway

Yes, it was a massive strain on the budgets of many people, and it's the people who managed to sacrifice enough to show up for work or get where they needed to go anyway even though it was difficult for them who were most impacted by congestion pricing.

> People take the subway.

Many do. When it's an option for them and at the expense of time/convenience. If this were an acceptable excuse we might as well just shut the roads into Manhattan down entirely.

This article proves that people have been being priced out of driving into the city and I promise you that isn't the millionaires who are suddenly navigating the subway system and waiting for the trains in filthy stations.

It's also important to note that nationally, nobody knows or cares about the specific differences in NYC compared to their own cities. The vast majority of the people outside of NYC complaining about it have never even been to the state. They just know that once again, it's the small guy who is getting screwed over and that they don't want the success of congestion pricing in New York (however that is measured) to cause it to appear where they drive, and who can blame them for that?

>I assure you that Manhattan is filled with many employees and service workers.

That is not a meaningful response to "Very, very few people must drive into the center of Manhattan to work.", the two statements do not contradict each other. Those employees and service workers take the subway.

> When it's an option for them and at the expense of time/convince

The subway is both faster and cheaper than driving in NYC at peak hours. Traffic has historically been awful, hence the congestion charge! Trading money to gain time/convenience is what the rich do. The "small guy" didn't have the money for the bridges, tunnels and parking before the congestion charge even arrived.

> It's also important to note that nationally, nobody knows or cares about the specific differences in NYC compared to their own cities.

Yes, that is literally my point about why conversations like this one are fruitless.

> They just know that the small guy is getting screwed over

Right but that isn't true. They are mistaken in what they "know" because, as you said, they don't know or care about the specific differences in NYC compared to their own cities.

> Those employees and service workers take the subway.

Not the ones who need to bring service vehicles with them. Not anyone who has to enter or return with heavy items or any number of the other many many reasons people choose to drive and not take the subway. The fact of the matter is that the subway has always been an option for many people, but not all people and it comes with costs of its own. The people driving into the city, as obnoxious as that trip is, were making the decision to put up with the traffic and parking for a reason. Now many of those people, enough to make measurable differences in pollution levels, have been priced out of that choice. "It's only a few poors, why are people bitching about it?" isn't going to make people across the country worry any less about it spreading to them.

> The subway is both faster and cheaper than driving in NYC at peak hours.

And also not an option at all for many and a less attractive option for many, as noted by the number of people who were driving. It's not as if the subway is a well kept secret.

> Right but that isn't true.

Just because you say it isn't doesn't make it true. Show me that millionaires are taking the subway because of the increased fines at the same rate as the hourly workers and I'll concede that the impact is being equally felt.

Again, this conversation would be so much more rewarding if you had read the paper and established a minimal level of factual basis for your statements. The number of light vehicles (cars, vans, pickups) entering the zone has not declined! At all!