Key Findings
Who Pays and Who Benefits
Minimal Impact on Most Commuters
The introduction of the $15 congestion pricing fee in Manhattan, a measure designed to alleviate traffic congestion and generate revenue for public transportation improvements, will impact a relatively small percentage of commuters across various legislative districts. Specifically, only 0.51% to 1.78% of commuters per legislative district will be affected by this fee. To put these percentages into context, let’s consider the absolute numbers:
- New Jersey State Legislative Districts: 27,514 commuters
- New York State Assembly Districts: 173,843 commuters
These figures illustrate that, although the congestion pricing fee will introduce an additional cost for some commuters, the overall number of individuals affected is quite limited compared to the total commuting population. This minimal impact can be attributed to several factors, including the existing reliance on alternative forms of transportation and the geographical distribution of the workforce.
High Reliance on Public Transportation
The use of public transportation varies significantly between commuters from New York and New Jersey. In New York districts, a substantial portion of the commuting population relies on transit to travel to work in Lower Manhattan, with 14-16% of commuters opting for this mode of transportation. In contrast, only 2-4% of commuters from New Jersey districts use transit for the same purpose. This discrepancy highlights the differences in transit infrastructure and accessibility between the two states.
The high reliance on public transportation in New York districts suggests that a significant portion of the workforce is already accustomed to using transit options, which likely reduces the number of drivers who will be directly impacted by the congestion pricing fee. This reliance is crucial for understanding the broader implications of the fee, as it underscores the need for robust and efficient public transportation systems to support the commuting population.
Importantly, across all district types, the number of commuters using public transportation far exceeds those who will need to pay the congestion fee. This indicates that the congestion pricing policy is targeting a smaller segment of the commuting population, thereby minimizing the overall disruption while potentially encouraging more sustainable transportation habits.
Income Differences Between Drivers and Transit Riders
Examining the income levels between drivers and transit riders reveals some interesting variations depending on the district. In New York Congressional Districts, transit riders tend to earn slightly more than drivers, with an income ratio of 0.94. This suggests that public transportation users in these areas might have higher income levels, possibly due to the high cost of living and the efficient public transportation system that makes commuting by transit a viable and attractive option.
Conversely, in New Jersey Congressional Districts, drivers earn on average 6% more than transit riders, with an income ratio of 1.06. This disparity could be influenced by several factors, including the availability and convenience of driving versus public transportation options in New Jersey. The higher earnings of drivers may also reflect the necessity of owning a vehicle in areas where public transit is less accessible or less reliable.
In other district types, the income disparities between drivers and transit riders are minimal, indicating a more balanced economic landscape. This balance suggests that the financial impact of the congestion pricing fee will vary, but it is generally positioned to affect those with relatively higher incomes more significantly.
The $15 congestion pricing fee, therefore, represents a smaller proportion of income for affected drivers compared to the average income of transit riders. This differential impact underscores the fee’s progressive nature, where higher-income individuals are more likely to bear the cost, while the broader benefits of reduced congestion and improved transit services can be shared by a larger portion of the population.
Note: The analysis of the impact of the congestion pricing fee draws on data from the Census Transportation Planning Products (CTPP), which is derived from the 2012-2016 American Community Survey (ACS). This data provides a detailed breakdown of median income by the type of transportation people use to commute to Manhattan’s Central Business District (CBD). However, to incorporate the most recent data from the 2022 ACS, the income analysis extends to commutes to all job locations, as the 2022 ACS does not offer the same granularity as the CTPP.
Conclusion
The data supports the case for congestion pricing, highlighting that it will affect a small percentage of generally higher-income commuters while potentially benefiting a larger number of transit riders. The policy is designed to create a more efficient and sustainable urban transportation system by discouraging excessive car use, reducing traffic congestion, and generating revenue for public transportation improvements. This approach aligns with broader urban planning and environmental goals, promoting a shift towards more sustainable and equitable transportation solutions.
By understanding the specific impacts and broader implications of the congestion pricing fee, policymakers and stakeholders can better appreciate the nuanced benefits and challenges associated with this initiative. Ultimately, the success of the congestion pricing policy will depend on its ability to balance the financial burden on commuters with the long-term benefits of a more efficient and environmentally friendly transportation system.
Have Questions or Feedback?
Tell Governor Hochul:Unpause Congestion Pricing!
Tri-State
Transportation Campaign
Mobilizing The Region