Congestion Pricing Not the Solution to U.S. Transportation Woes
Congestion pricing is touted as the cure for gridlock and pollution. But it comes at a cost to motorists, businesses and the economy. And the cost is disproportionately high when compared with the benefits gained. Adding capacity with new infrastructure funded by fuel taxes is a better solution.
 |
YEARS AFTER EUROPEAN AND ASIAN governments first imposed road pricing schemes as a means of reducing congestion and alleviating pollution, the United States appears poised for its own misguided attempt to utilize congestion pricing as a solution for growing transportation woes.
The premise is that congestion pricing will give motorists better road access, for a price. In many instances, however, congestion pricing does not markedly reduce congestion; it merely raises revenues — or taxes. Congestion pricing increases cargo transportation costs and hurts the economy. And higher manufacturers’ and retailers’ operating costs mean higher costs to consumers for everything from gasoline to clothing to food.
Adding capacity with new infrastructure funded by fuel taxes is a better solution. Motorists have already paid taxes to use the roadways. And fuel taxes are a much more efficient way to fund the new infrastructure that can effectively reduce congestion.
Proponents of congestion pricing say those who don’t want to pay or cannot afford to pay increased commuting costs have other choices. Making all drivers pay the same tax to receive the same service, however, is only logical if every vehicle operator has the ability to change his or her driving behavior. For motor carriers, this simply isn’t the case.
Given the just-in-time delivery system that services a customer base expecting goods to be on store shelves when consumers are ready to purchase them, truck drivers do not determine delivery times. Shippers do. If the trucking industry could avoid congestion by shifting delivery times and operating at night, it would already have dove so without needing any new incentive.
Congestion pricing merely stands as a new tax to further limit an industry that already operates with extremely low profit margins. As a result, if congestion pricing were introduced, trucks undoubtedly would shift from tolled bridges and tunnels to un-tolled routes and other roadways outside of the congestion zone boundaries.
At its core, congestion pricing is designed to change driving behavior. However if there’s no change in driving behavior, the promised benefits of congestion reduction and pollution mitigation will not materialize.
Even in London, home of the model urban congestion pricing scheme, new reports show that congestion is just eight percent below pre-program levels and continues to rise — and this is after spending nearly half of the $14 per vehicle charged for entering the city’s center on overhead. Motorists’ right to travel freely is also curtailed. Motorists in London complain of an invasion of privacy from video cameras and tracking devices, and residents of neighborhoods near the city complain of increased congestion.
If London is anything to go by, then U.S. cities that impose congestion pricing are doomed to repeat its mistakes, spending higher fees only to witness a dismal return — in addition to potential declines in commerce, manufacturing and retail sales.
The New York City proposal to charge motorists for driving into Manhattan is being touted as a cure for gridlock and pollution. But in reality, such pricing schemes are unfair and ineffective and ignore our real transportation needs.
Under New York’s recent proposal, trucks would be charged $21 per day and cars would be charged $8 per day to drive into Manhattan below 86th Street. That’s on top of the city’s already expensive parking fees.
Ultimately, motorists would pay $400 million for a mere 6.3 percent reduction in traffic. The cost is disproportionately high when compared with the benefits gained. Few would consider it a good rate of return for the investment.
New York City’s intentions are good. Like many parts of the United States, its transportation networks are strained, and the state is searching for an innovative solution to its problem. Across the United States, travel on the nation’s highways has nearly doubled since 1980 as the economy has grown. Yet the highway system has only been expanded by about three percent over the same period. The outcome is wasted time and energy.
Even the U.S. Environmental protection Agency has called congestion pricing “relatively risky to implement,” because people would have to pay for a service they were previously getting for free. Many people would rather have congestion than pay more, and it’s hard to predict how much emissions would be reduced.
Few would argue with the idea that something must be done. But congestion pricing comes at a cost to motorists, businesses and the economy. Moreover, the trucking industry believes the federal government must take a lead role in identifying systemic problems and working with individual states to fix them.