Cathartic Congestion Pricing Follow-Up
Apr 9th, 2008 by Jervey
We just can’t quit you, CP!
So, um, we know we said we won’t dwell too long on the State Assembly’s totally insane (and “cowardly” and “shameful”) refusal to even put CP to vote, but the media fallout (particularly the Silver-bashing) has been somehow cathartic. So if you’re looking for some sense of right and justice in the screwball world of NY politics, check out the following.
Bloomberg’s official statement. Highlight:
“If that wasn’t shameful enough, it takes a special type of cowardice for elected officials to refuse to stand up and vote their conscience- on an issue that has been debated, and amended significantly to resolve many outstanding issues, for more than a year. Every New Yorker has a right to know if the person they send to Albany was for or against better transit and cleaner air. People know where I stood, and where members of the City Council stood. They deserved at least that from Albany.”
Mayor’s full statement way below after the jump.
NY Mag’s Daily Intel has the best roundup of the local editorials:
• “Rarely does one man have a chance to do so much harm to so many,” intoned the New York Times editorial board, who went on to call him “cowardly,” “opaque and narrowly political,” and “unworthy of his office.”
• The Daily News, which lambasted the Assembly speaker with a front-page headline reading “SHELL GAME OF SHAME,” wrote a staff editorial saying he “never gave congestion pricing a fair shot.”
• NYDN columnist Michael Daly went a step further, saying that Silver “said ‘no’ to democracy.” “What Shelly doesn’t want, nobody gets,” Daly griped, asking: “Why even have the rest of the Assembly?”
• “The cynicism and dysfunction of Albany have reached new depths,” added the Newsday editorial board, who called Silver’s rejection of the plan “murder.” “It’s a dark day for New York,” they warned. “And there’s no silver lining.”
Charlie Komanoff hits Grist with his 10 reasons CP went “belly up.” It’s worth a full read (even the comments, in which Brodsky responds and there’s a bit of a back and forth.)
Mark Caserta from 3R Living, who himself has a bunch of political experience in the city, has a great breakdown of why it didn’t pass. His bulleted thoughts (ledes excerpted here, check out the full post for more evaluation):
* Congestion Pricing, as a concept, would have been good for New York City.
* The plan failed partially because it opened, once again, the divide between Manhattan and its Outer Boroughs.
* The economy is slow and people are worried about the high cost of living in the city.
* The strategy that the Mayor and his supporters used (promising to punish those who did not go along with Congestion Pricing while lavishing pork on those who did) has proven to be a failure in Albany over and over again.
* From what I understand, the Congestion Pricing plan was to be approved without an Environmental Impact Statement. [3R Blogging]
STATEMENT BY MAYOR MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG ON THE FAILURE OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO VOTE CONGESTION PRICING
“Today is a sad day for New Yorkers and a sad day for New York City. Not only won’t we see the realization of a plan that would have cut traffic, spurred our economy, reduced pollution and improved public health, we will also lose out on nearly $500 million annually for mass transit improvements and $354 million in immediate federal funds.
“I will be speaking with Secretary Peters and will express my thanks for her commitment to innovative solutions to real problems facing large cities today. I will also express my deep disappointment that, sadly, even Washington, which most Americans agree is completely dysfunctional, is more willing to try new approaches to longstanding problems than our elected officials in the State Assembly. It takes true leadership and courage to embrace new concepts and ideas and to be willing to try something. Unfortunately, both are lacking in the Assembly today.
“If that wasn’t shameful enough, it takes a special type of cowardice for elected officials to refuse to stand up and vote their conscience- on an issue that has been debated, and amended significantly to resolve many outstanding issues, for more than a year. Every New Yorker has a right to know if the person they send to Albany was for or against better transit and cleaner air. People know where I stood, and where members of the City Council stood. They deserved at least that from Albany.
“The idea for congestion pricing didn’t start in our Administration and it won’t end today. The $354 million we would have received from Washington tomorrow will go to another city in another state. But the problems congestion pricing could have helped solve are only going to get worse. And too many people from more than 170 environmental, labor, public health and business organizations recognize the merits of congestion pricing and hopefully someday, we will have more leaders in the Legislature who recognize it too.
“We will continue to push forward on the other 126 proposals in PlaNYC that will reduce our carbon footprint and green our City. We will move forward on proposals to plant 1 million trees, introduce hybrid taxis and install green roofs on City buildings. Congestion pricing is just one part of our ambitious agenda.
“I want to thank everyone who has worked tirelessly for congestion pricing and I want to acknowledge the courage and leadership that our partners in the City Council, Speaker Quinn, Governor Paterson, former Governor Spitzer, Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, Assembly Minority Leader Jim Tedisco and some in the Legislature have shown by working together to convince their colleagues to support congestion pricing. Together, we will continue to work to build a greener, greater New York City.”