Kathy Hochul’s Major Congestion Pricing Misstep Reveals She Understands It’s a Flawed Concept

Governor Kathy Hochul has fully embraced her congestion-pricing tolls.

After a federal judge from New Jersey issued a ruling on Monday that she and the MTA interpret as clearance for a Jan. 5 initiation of the tolls, the governor smugly stated: “This is a massive win for commuters in both New York and New Jersey.”

A win for commuters? Far from it.

On the New York side of the debate, the $9 toll (which is already projected to increase to $12, then $15 over the next six years) for drivers traveling south of 60th Street in Manhattan will hit less affluent residents in the outer boroughs the hardest, impacting cops, teachers, firefighters, and other essential service providers.

Even worse, according to the MTA’s own studies, this plan will likely increase traffic in The Bronx and Staten Island (essentially moving the traffic congestion from wealthier Manhattan areas).

For New Jersey residents, the toll will not only burden commuters but also deter casual visitors from entering the city, which will lead to a decrease in their spending at local restaurants, shops, and theaters.

This occurs amidst a backdrop of extreme fiscal mismanagement from the MTA.

Included are $252 million spent on subway intercoms that proved to be virtually useless.

A fare increase of around 4% in 2025, followed by another increase in 2027.

A request for $1.27 billion to procure 435 new subway cars (at nearly double the per-car cost of what Chicago paid for 400 new cars).

State Comptroller Tom DiNapoli recently released a scathing report indicating the agency’s financial struggles.

If this toll is indeed beneficial for commuters, Governor, why did you “pause” it back in June — and when you resumed it post-Election Day, did you temporarily reduce it to $9?

Let’s be clear: Hochul is no fool; she understands that congestion pricing is unpopular and serves mainly to generate revenue for a failing MTA.

However, modern Democrats rarely amend their course after making significant errors.

Instead, they present a distorted narrative: “Win for commuters” is her take on “the border is secure.”

It’s disingenuous and unfortunate — and once again, the primary burden will fall on the average New Yorkers she claims to represent.