In January, the long-planned congestion pricing program in New York finally began to raise a taxi. Following the leadership of a handful of cities around the world – London, Stockholm, Milan, Singapore – most of those who are driving in the Central Business District in Lower Manhattan, a $ 9 fee is now being charged.
Donald Trump is a longtime critic of the program, which is the first of its kind in America and aims to reduce emission discharge trafficking and raise billions to finance infrastructure. The administration is currently locked in a court battle with the city’s city transport body on the legality of the fee.
Trump was not alone in his skepticism. Phil Murphy, New Jersey’s democratic governor, who counts many traveling to New York among his constituents, also challenged the program in court. And, though he voted have enhanced As it started, public opinion was initially doubtful enough to convince New York Governor Katie Hochul to delay the implementation until the presidential election.
However, for all disputes, most evidence shows that policy has been extremely successful in reducing traffic that has struck Manhattan and financing such necessary improvements in the public transport system, with relatively few negative consequences.
Several indicators suggest a prolonged reduction in traffic B, within and around the congestion zone. MTA data It shows a 13 % drop in vehicles entering the central business district in March against historical average, plus faster movement through the bridges and tunnels, which are often escaped from traffic. This is supported by data from the INRIX analysis company, which also shows minimal changes in Manhattan bridges outside the area.
On the financing part, $ 500 million, which MTA intends to collect this year from securities before the big bond issue, provides investment for projects, including signal improvement, stations and lengthening lines. They will improve the accessibility and efficiency of transport in the long run.
A recent work document from economists in collaboration with Google researchers made similar conclusions from Google Maps trends. They indicate an increase in traffic speeds in and inside the area without negative effects on local roads. Critics have expressed concern about the “transfusion effects” in neighboring communities, but researchers found that most of these areas have benefited as a whole. More free bridges and tunnels can also mean less intervention in local traffic.
During the decisive peak hours, the data show that the speed of the bar was also faster inside the area than during the same period last year, while those outside were reduced closely. This implies a shorter deadline for the response of emergency vehicles in the area maintained by data from the Fire Service in New York.
Legislators were also concerned about local business. But the analysis of the New York Corporation for Economic Development found an increase in pedestrian traffic in the area, in 2024. In 2024, in 2024 it was 3.1 percent.
Perhaps the most important thing is that the injuries and victims of pedestrian and cyclist crashes seem to have fallen dramatically in the area, according to data From the Non -Profit Group Chekpeds.
Each fee will raise questions about accessibility for regular travelers – central criticism by some legislators. In a letter from January to Trump, Murphy called the “Disaster for Working and Middle Classes in New Jersey Travel and residents who need or want to visit Dolna Manhattan.” And yet, even before the fee, just 11 percent of traveling traveling in the central business area traveling by car. Such a trip, of course, has never been free: drivers spend money to maintain gasoline and car and time located in Manhattan traffic.
But while the congestion debate began as a struggle for politics, it became an ideological battle at Trump. The increasing evidence of the success of the program may not matter in the Presidency, which mainly opposes investment in public transport at the expense of drivers. But as its benefits became clearer, public support began to facilitate the fee for local politicians to defend themselves.
Hochul is an excellent example. After publicly criticizing the fee last year, she is already a fierce defender. After hours after the most new leglet From the Ministry of Transport she had replied In social media: “Cameras (fees) remain on.”