If it fails, pro-transit and pro-pedestrian groups will be so outraged that a better plan may become inevitable.

I don't claim to know the answer, but failure may be our best hope. Let's hope that you're right, and I'm wrong.

So maybe the bill will pass as a pilot program; a start is better than nothing, but I really believe New Yorkers deserve a much better plan than this one ...

You won't get much argument from me on that one. The crux is really what we can expect if this version fails in Albany. Will all the people who've been saying "we have to do something, but this plan is not the right one" turn around and say "New Yorkers have rejected congestion pricing" and use that as an argument for doing nothing?

If you trust the Legislature (ha!) to keep safe streets, clean air and transit funding on the front burner, then the $354 million probably shouldn't stand in the way of a better plan. This is the same legislature (mostly the same people) that passed all of Pataki's budgets that cut the MTA, and revoked the commuter tax. They've had a year to come up with a better plan, but instead they've been content to groan about the plans that other people proposed.

I'm very afraid that if we don't hold their feet to the fire on this one, then we'll lose our only opportunity for meaningful change. The current system is massively unfair to working New Yorkers, particularly the poor, and it kills. Be as skeptical as you want, but be careful not to undermine the best chance for real reform that we've had in a century.

But let's say the current plan passes—do you really believe that all the projections are accurate? All indications are that revenues and traffic reductions will be lower than those claimed.

I take mass transit almost exclusively, so perhaps I should support this bill in any incarnation, but after a lifetime of broken promises, I simply don't trust the MTA.

So maybe the bill will pass as a pilot program; a start is better than nothing, but I really believe New Yorkers deserve a much better plan than this one, one that addresses driver reform, traffic law enforcement, and makes the MTA directly accountable to the public. And to really be effective, the fee needs to be higher; the fee in London is about double.

• 46 New Subway Cars, primarily for EF Lines
• 6 Additional Buses for the B6 Route
• Rehabilitate West End D & M Line Stations at 20th Ave.,
Bay Parkway, and 25th Ave.
• Rehabilitate West End D & M Line Structure from 9th Ave.
to Bay 50th Street
• Rehabilitate Sea Beach N Line Stations at Kings Highway,
Bay Parkway, 86th Street, and Ave. U
• Rehabilitate Sea Beach N Line Retaining Wall from 5th
Ave. Portal to Ave. U
• Upgrade Culver F Line Stations Public Address and
Customer Information Systems at Ave. N, P, & U
• Refurbish Culver F Line overcoating and interlocking
between Church Ave. to West 8th St.

These trains all serve Mr. Colton's district.

I think it's a much better idea to keep NY at its current population and encourage other cities to reform their sprawl in place. It's a lot easier for someone to move from the sprawling suburbs of Atlanta to a new transit-oriented apartment building in downtown Atlanta than to NYC. Atlanta can sustain a significant portion of its current population, just not spread out the way it is.

Similarly, it's easier for people to move from a subdivision outside Syosset to a new apartment building in downtown Syosset than to Brooklyn.

question: It's not matter of whether capitalism is sustainable, it's what we should do to make the best city in our environment. We're all going to die someday, and our civilization will collapse. It's just a matter of time.

However, it's better for the environment if more people move from higher energy sprawl to lower energy cities. It's better for New Yorkers if more people move to New York (in a controlled way, living in housing... I'm not talking about booming shantytowns in Bombay). If we have more people here, and more wealth, it will be easier to pay for services. Some day we might have to build a giant dyke to protect the city from rising sea levels... in that case it will be better to have more people here.

Successful cities that are pleasant to live in and have good economies do not shrink, especially when there's freedom of movement. As much as people complain about the environmental impact of a new apartment building (or "luxury condo building"), the impact to the environment is much worse if those people are spread out in balloon frame houses along an access road with three cars per house.

Congestion pricing is about increasing the carrying capacity of New York by efficiently allocating road space and by building up the transit network that's much more efficient.

Let me get this straight: you're harkening back to the City of Brooklyn, a time before the automobile, while calling congestion pricing a "travel tax"? The only people that think of Brooklyn as a suburb are those that drive from their houses there to jobs in Manhattan. Those that "travel" by subway, for which there is already a "tax", are decidedly more urban.

He is betraying his constituents and doing a grave injustice to the people of this city.))

Simcha Felder has gotten an ear full from the local Rabinical powers in Boro Park, and is almost afraid to stick his nose out of his office since the vote and it's clear he's going to be tossed from office....

Just saying, a bribe is a bribe.

The me get this straight. You actually believe Brooklyn is a suburb. That about sums up the stupidy of the pro-travel tax lobby. They just don't understand how Brooklyn came into this union thing called New York City.

Pffff.

He is betraying his constituents and doing a grave injustice to the people of this city.

That's why CP is necessary: To allow the city to have a greater carrying capacity.

A plumber could very easily charge his customers a $3 additional fee for each call he answers in Manhattan. If he gets 3 or more Manhattan calls that day, he recoups his CP fee. Plus, having the fee in place would ensure that he can take more calls in one day, since there will be less traffic.

And if 93 percent of trucks act as you expect, the program is a success. Congestion pricing doesn't need or want to change the average case.

Doc, I'm not in the zone but I doubt that delivery trucks looking to avoid the $21 fee would split their daily runs so as to continue making uptown deliveries during the day.

Yes, I'm up late tonight. A two-year-old will do that to you sometimes. later......