And of course , as I written before, to give cab and limo riders free pass from this plan, is its biggest failing.

Yes, and as people have responded before, cab users already pay a fare set by the city, and money is already going back to the city from this. The TLC could implement congestion pricing at any time, without state approval, just by adjusting the fare by time of day.

And of course , as I written before, to give cab and limo riders free pass from this plan,
is its biggest failing. Something like 50% of travel within the CP zone is by cab and limo – and remember this is the area where mass-transit has most options – yet somehow no plan to have this group pay anything to improve mass-transit or encourage to use mass transit.
This short-sightedness stinks of favoring certain group of constituents over another.

AMERICANS: GUILTY OF EXTRAVAGANT OVER-INDULGENCE–TOO MANY CARS

It is time for America to start increasing the taxes on car ownership. If a household owns more than one car, there should be an increasingly higher annual tax on every car after the first one.

This would be a fair way to encourage a reduction of cars on the road, to increase revenues for road and transit system improvements, and to fight Global Warming.

How do we all live well without so many cars? The answer, and the plan, is found in a great new book, “HOW TO LIVE WELL WITHOUT OWNING A CAR” by Chris Balish.

Scary, if the rest of the democratic Senate conference works in this fashion. Congestion pricing will probably need some of their votes.

The livable streets forces have limited political capital to spend and is it worth bothering with the Senate Minority, do they really have to be brought along or can Bruno deliver the Senate? I think he can and the political forces should be concentrated on the City Council a majority of whom are term limited and need to deliver a home rule message in the end.

In that regard, I have often suggested that the livable streets tendency needs to organize politically around the Tammany Hall clubhouse model. If livable streets clubs were in place when petitioning season begins in earnest they will be able to hold out to the term limited city council people the possibility that they could help with what they need most, their next political job. I’m sure Bloomberg is offering them money but ultimately someone has to stand out by the subway stations with the petitions for candidates. That is how the clubhouse moves.

As it is the opposition to CP has an active and dominant clubhouse presence and they are not concerned with Bloomberg’s campaign contributions even if they are greater than what the parking industry would, could or will offer.

Ergo, selling c.p. on the basis of a.q. and asthma isn’t a winning strategy.

For Montgomery, the linchpin should be the improvements in transit service, combined with the likelihood that her constituents will pony up a sub-proportionate share of the dollars.

The first order of business in educating Sen.
Montgomery should be to document/calculate the extremely small percentage of c.p. costs that will fall on her constituents. Something like: “your 300,000 (?) constituents, comprising 4 percent (?) of New York City residents, will contribute only 1 percent (?) of c.p. toll revenues …”

high asthma hoods have lots of buses, so more buses must equal more asthma

that’s wrong because it’s the bus depots and traffic congestion, not buses per se, that cause the air pollution that triggers asthma. also, all of the buses that are part of the plan are clean hybrid buses.

There’s a lot of misinformation out there.