With the deadline for $354m in federal matching funds for New York City congestion charging (CG) looming (April 7), the New York Times ongoing support for the plan is approaching fever pitch. In the ironically titled Op Ed "Moment of Truth on Congestion Pricing," the Old Gray Lady argues that "The only way to ensure the [City's mass transit] system will continue to work is to move forward on congestion pricing." In the lead up to this "do or die" conclusion, the Times' rhetoric [once again] flies in the face of the facts. "What it [the M.T.A.] needs is a reliable source of income. As London and Stockholm have discovered, congestion pricing could provide that— and cleaner air and less gridlock." Anyway, "the M.T.A. has developed detailed plans for that money, including providing express buses to the outer boroughs where resistance is strongest." Nice. And what about poor people who have to drive into the City? "One sensible proposal would allow those drivers to apply for rebates on their applications for the Earned Income Tax Credit." Fortunately for opponents of the NYC CG, the Governor who supported the plan didn't confine his enthusiasm for prostitution to his political career.
9 Comments on “NYT: Congestion Charging Approaches “Moment of Truth”...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
What about aliens who come into Manhattan riding elephants? Come on.
M1EK :
And what about poor people who have to drive into the City?
What about aliens who come into Manhattan riding elephants? Come on.
Did I say poor? Sorry, I meant to use the PC term “low income.” Here’s the actual text from the NYT Op Ed:
“As we see it, none of Mr. Silver’s objections should be deal-breakers. He wants New Jersey drivers to pay a fee in addition to the $8 toll to cross the Hudson River. Something extra seems reasonable, especially since the goal is to get more cars off the streets. He wants a break for the small number of low-income drivers who have no other way to get to work.”
[BTW: I didn't mention the "getting cars off the street is reasonable" shtick, 'cause there's only so much contentiousness I can pack into one blog post.]
Contrary to what the NYT reports and what their editors believe, there will be no expansion of MTA services:
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/24/mta-postpones-subway-and-bus-service-upgrades/index.html?ex=1364097600&en=11a4950c2f69b82e&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&scp=1-b&sq=mta+&st=nyt
This bit of news comes on the heels of increased subway fares. Fares that the MTA justified with the promise of service improvements.
And this article doesn’t even touch on the effect it will have on New Jersey drivers who face paying $16/day to commute, meanwhile, sitting along the NJ Turnpike is this beautiful station in Secaucus that is woefully underutilized because the planners in their infinite wisdom never built a parking lot for it. An even sadder joke when you learn that they constructed a turnpike exit specifically for this station.
http://www.northjersey.com/news/transportation/Time_to_end_the_big_joke_at_Secaucus.html
“One sensible proposal would allow those drivers to apply for rebates on their applications for the Earned Income Tax Credit.”
NewYork City charges income tax to people who set foot within their boundaries? They certainly couldn’t mean federal taxes/IRS Earned Income Tax Credit; because as far as I know they would have no way of making the federal government provide this rebate from federal tax reciepts , which I believe are completely seperate from City taxes even when they are called a congestion charge.
What they want is to make the low income drivers beholden to them for giving them something for nothing when actually they are giving them a lot of hassle for nothing. Since the charge will likely not dent congestion much, I think it will negatively affect property values and lease rates.
OTOH, there are a BUNCH of folks in that area scared to death they will have no job tomorrow. This is not a good time to go for a tax hike.
A solution to constipations, uhmm, congestions. All cars have colours, prohibit each day a different colour of cars to be driven. the good part is, that it will be easy to notice violators, as they will shine out in the streets as `not fitting` for today. i would like to see the `No yellow` day for New york.
I too was thinking “hmmm, beginning of a recession is a GREAT time to add a huge tax that stifles business (shopping, commuting, etc.)”
Well we certainly can’t have those people who drive into the city for the sheer joy of it continue to do so. This plan will definitely get them off the roads.
What is really going on is that the MTA has PENSIONS they have to pay for. The money is not going to used for anything to do with “service”. They’ll show you the empty bank account for the services and upgrades but neglect to explain that all the money coming in is going to the retirees.