Is Congestion Pricing The Way To Go?

It's next to impossible to drive in downtown Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York or Seattle during rush hour.  Most people plan their business and shopping around the "off" hours, if possible.  Well, there really are no off hours anymore, as the number of cars increase.  What's a city to do?  Maybe congestion pricing is the way to go.

Several large cities, including London, Singapore and Stockholm have tried it and apparently like it.  What it means is that your car will be charged an additional fee for driving in the busy zones during rush hour.  London requires permits to travel in the inner city, and it has really relieved the congestion.  New York City has just adopted a plan to charge an additional fee for driving in the congested zone.  Will this work?

No doubt it will relieve some traffic, but probably not as much as proponents would like or expect.  Right now the average speed in an urban downtown area is 15mph, down from 18 mph just three years ago.  In LA and New York, the speed is more like 11 mph.  Unacceptable.  But, is putting a tax on cars in downtown fair and equitable?  Probably not.  The rich can afford to pay the tax, and will willingly do so to reduce gridlock.  The poor, who have had to move out of downtown because of high costs, have moved to the suburbs where rents are cheaper, but will have to pay an additional tax to drive downtown.

We have had toll roads for decades, and they have improved traffic flow on highways tremendously.  The fees paid go to improving roads and bridges.  I'm not sure congestion pricing is equitable for all, but it is necessary.  Mass transportation, like subways and trains are not relieving traffic enough.  A tax on those who use the roads seems reasonable.  If it's successful in New York, other American cities are sure to follow.