Trump’s Pledge to Eliminate Congestion Pricing: Here’s His Game Plan

In his initial week back in office, President Trump rapidly accomplished a series of tasks he promised to tackle: securing the border, eliminating DEI, and abolishing climate regulations.

However, a campaign pledge remains unaddressed: “TERMINATE Congestion Pricing in my FIRST WEEK!!!”

Should Trump proceed with this initiative, New York’s Democratic leaders may find themselves with limited options to oppose him, even if they wanted to.

Having been in operation for just three weeks, congestion pricing advocates hope you will overlook its implementation.

The state-operated Metropolitan Transportation Authority has made available only one week’s worth of data, which indicates an approximate 8% reduction in vehicle volume within the congestion zone.

There’s no information regarding whether numerous trucks are rerouting around Manhattan rather than driving through it. This was a significant concern, given that the MTA’s environmental review projected hundreds of additional trucks daily on the Cross-Bronx Expressway alone.

We lack any details on whether areas in northern New Jersey and Staten Island are experiencing increased traffic, as the congestion-pricing evaluation suggested they would.

Furthermore, the MTA hasn’t provided insight into whether drivers have transitioned to public transit or are simply circumventing Midtown and Lower Manhattan.

The MTA could create a dashboard to share this crucial information with the public.

Instead, it notes that “post-implementation data [will be] collected approximately three months after the start of tolling operations.”

It’s uncertain if congestion pricing will last three months.

Truthfully, not much occurred last week—primarily due to Trump needing to install key personnel before initiating any actions.

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-Staten Island), a prominent critic of congestion pricing, informed me that Trump’s Department of Transportation, through the Federal Highway Administration, could potentially reverse the Biden administration’s approval of the program.

This means Trump’s DOT could retroactively rescind the federal backing for the toll, on the grounds that the MTA failed to provide a comprehensive environmental impact statement that assesses the program’s long-term effects on air quality outside the congestion zone.

Opponents argue that such a statement is essential for federal endorsement; however, the Biden administration accepted the MTA’s brief environmental “assessment” instead.

Sean Duffy, Trump’s pick for DOT, is pending Senate confirmation, and Trump has yet to appoint a highway administrator.

“Once those positions are filled,” said Malliotakis, “we can get to work.”

Typically, retroactively revoking approval for a highway project—like congestion pricing, which affects major federally funded roads—would be unusual.

However, a federal judge still has yet to rule on New Jersey’s lawsuit challenging the program, which hinges on the Biden DOT’s claim that the environmental assessment was adequate.

If the new administration’s DOT alters its stance in court, it could complicate the judge’s ability to rule favorably for New York.

Duffy had his Senate committee hearing in mid-January, where he received bipartisan support, and no one inquired about congestion pricing.

The committee lacks any New York senators—yet it seems likely that a national Democrat would have raised the issue, given that NYC’s congestion pricing scheme is intended as a national pilot.

The committee does include a Democratic senator from New Jersey, Andy Kim, who limited his comments to questioning whether the Trump-era DOT would continue financing new Amtrak tunnels under the Hudson (most likely).

In the meantime, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy reminded Trump last week that he considers the program a “disaster.”

Malliotakis also presented Trump with a letter signed by 26 state and local officials urging him to terminate the program.

While Trump is hearing from numerous opponents, he has received little support from those expected to champion the cause.

Hochul, who rushed to revive the program after Trump’s election that she had previously “paused,” didn’t emphasize it as a notable accomplishment in her recent state of the state address or budget report.

Moreover, her budgetary emphasis has complicated her ability to communicate congestion pricing’s potential financial benefits—due to her current quest for an additional couple billion more dollars annually for the MTA through new taxes and fees.

Considering congestion pricing advocates have long argued that the program will resolve our transit-funding crises, it’s challenging to counter with, “We just stabilized transit! Now pay more to save it again.”

Mayor Adams, who has consistently wavered on the issue, now denies any accountability, claiming that his opinion “doesn’t matter.”

Opponents also have an alternative route: If the Federal Highway Administration approach fails, the GOP-majority Congress might pass a provision that prevents federal highway funding for cities imposing a toll to enter a specific district.

New York’s swing-district House members, including Malliotakis and Hudson Valley Rep. Mike Lawler, would likely lead such a provision.

This situation exemplifies what occurs when Democrats disconnect from their constituents: they lose power in Washington, along with diminishing authority over the very cities and states they nominally govern.

Nicole Gelinas is a contributing editor to the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal.