Submitted by Susan Parker, Jul 16, 2007 10:03

Congestion pricing is just another way to make Manhattan into a safe, convenient playground for the rich, for whom $8 is trivial, but for whom being stuck in traffic is a drag. Meanwhile, the rest of us are stuck on even more crowded, miserable, inconvenient, lengthy public transit rides that, even according to the MTA, cannot handle any more traffic. Their solution is that we should travel off-peak on lines that aren't overcrowded because they don't go where we need to go at the time we need to be there; few of us are riding the subways just for the fun of it—we have to be at work in a specific place at a specific time. As to the mayor's let them eat cake attitude, I'm sure the trains aren't that crowded when you're surrounded by guards with guns. And some of us can't leave home at 6:00 a.m. to beat the rush—we have families and responsibilities, and no staff to take care of them for us. As to the transparently bogus asthma risk reduction, this plan brings MORE traffic to the worst affected areas, poor neighborhoods outside the designated zone.

I certainly do not support a plan developed by billionaires and millionaires to turn over public roads to the rich as a private benefit. When the mayor gives up a private HELICOPTER, among other polluting luxuries such as multiple HUGE homes, maybe I'll be ready to listen to his plans for the rest of us. And please note that while NYC taxpayers who support the building and maintenance of these roads will pay this regressive tax, estimated at over $2,000 a year, commuters who don't even pay a commuter tax any more, but use all city services, will get a free ride by deducting bridge and tunnel tolls; the mayor confirmed that New Jersey commuters would be unaffected by this plan.

I would like to suggest several alternatives to congestion pricing. Since traffic only accounts for 20% of the pollution, why not tackle it all with pollution credits that can be traded, as is done now in Europe. This would give each resident pollution credits, and according to how large an apartment, whether they have a car, etc. they could either use or sell those credits. Since rich people tend to have large (even multiple) homes (again, the mayor even has a private helicopter) while the middle class live in smaller spaces, often without cars, this plan would be far less regressive than the current plan and would not require the invasion of privacy 1000 cameras present. Or, for a much simpler, cheaper, non-invasive low-tech solution that could work immediately, why not try enforcing the current traffic laws on double (or often triple) parking, blocking the intersections etc.? At the very least, extensive hearings should be held to determine what needs to be done. I'm sure many others could contribute better ideas than the disaster we are having foisted upon us. Despite the mayor's and governor's opinions to the contrary, this is still a democracy and they have no right to govern by fiat.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.