NY Needs a Bailout for Drivers

I’ve worked in New York City for the last 23 years. I’ve held several jobs; some were close enough to my home that I could walk to them, but most were too many blocks or miles away. To get to those jobs, I’ve depended on the MTA’s buses and subways.

MTA, facing a multi-billion-dollar budget shortfall after months of fruitlessly asking Albany to fulfill its responsibility to find funding sources, last week voted on its "doomsday budget" and approved fare hikes ranging from 23 to 50 percent starting in June. Albany still has time to reverse this, but they've yet to display any leadership at all. The clock is ticking, and like a lot of commuters, I’m worried.

Although a commission led by former MTA chief Richard Ravitch came up with a solution in December that spreads responsibility for paying for transit fairly across a broad group of stakeholders, there’s an objection to one item that could scuttle the whole plan: tolling the East River and Harlem River bridges.

The success or failure of the effort to fund transit hinges on the opposition of Senator Carl Krueger and a handful of downstate Democrats. Even though the vast majority of their working constituents get to work via transit, and less than six percent drive to their jobs (most of whom don't use the East River bridges to get there), these senators are putting the interests of a tiny group of drivers above commuters. That killed Ravitch's excellent proposal, and no one else has displayed leadership and proposed an alternate plan.

Their reluctance to vote against tolls is understandable - they want every vote they can get and transit riders are used to being put upon - but it's hardly fair. Millions of New Yorkers who commute use public transit and only a small percentage of us drive to work on a daily basis. It’s clear that the needs of the many transit riders should outweigh the needs of the few drivers. It should be simple math.

Despite these facts, I’d like to suggest a bailout, but not to benefit the MTA or transit riders; despite rising prices and a shaky economy, perhaps we’ve had it easy for far too long. In the spirit of the times, I’d like to propose a bailout for those that least need help: New York’s commuters who get driven to work.

Think of it. A 23 percent transit fare hike is the right start, but it just doesn’t go far enough. Let’s raise the subway and bus fare 500% to $10, so we can make all the bridges in New York City free.

It’s not a big leap for riders to make. Right now, my Metrocard already pays to keep the East River and Harlem River bridges free. I like knowing that I’m doing something to help a small slice of wealthy NYC, Westchester and Long Island commuters who get driven to work in town cars. I hope that my fellow riders will feel the same way and gladly pay $10 per ride.

One huge benefit of raising the transit fares: lower maintenance and lower operating costs. Higher transit fares combined with recently lowered gas prices will encourage bus, commuter rail, and subway riders to drive to work. If less people use the subways, less transit system maintenance will be necessary. The MTA could take scores of buses, subways and trains offline, and no one would notice.

For those who argue that more cars on our city streets will not be easy to accommodate, one great solution is to build more highways through the heart of the city. As a resident of a Greenwich Village that is filled with new residents who own Hummers and luxury sport utility vehicles, I can say with confidence that no one here remembers Jane Jacobs and that Robert Moses perhaps had it right. Maybe it’s finally time for his planned highway across the Village. That road and others like it at 42^nd and 34^th streets should help solve any congestion problems caused by the $10 fare.

Luxury SUV owners also deserve a break. The price of gas may have fallen, but it still costs these SUV drivers a disproportionate amount of money to operate their gas-guzzling vehicles. By paying a $10 fare, those still forced to take public transit can help SUV owners to fill their tanks. The benefit here is that it will allow Wall Street middle managers to feel just as important as their bosses, whose corporate jets already are being subsidized by American taxpayers via the Wall Street bailout plan. Why shouldn’t lower level Wall Streeters get their fair share of the American dream?

Another great reason for a driver bailout is nostalgia. Tourists and residents like New York, but they really miss the great old days of the 1970’s, the "Fort Apache" days when the transit system didn’t work very well and pollution from the cars, trucks, and buses that choked the roads was at its worst. Who cares about juvenile asthma and pulmonary embolisms when we could have return to air with heft, color and character?

Folks on Staten Island and in parts of the Bronx have long complained that they have to pay big tolls to get to other boroughs, while drivers in Brooklyn, Queens, and Manhattan have been getting a free ride. Rather than charging the costs of maintaining bridges more fairly to the drivers who actually use them, the doomsday budget now requires that transit riders, Staten Islanders, residents of parts of the Bronx, and those that use railroads and tunnels pay even higher tolls and fares to keep the East River crossings free. Unless lawmakers in Albany can actually come up with a legislative alternative, those hikes will stand.

Again, the MTA doomsday plan is a good first step, but it just doesn’t go far enough. My proposal to increase each bus and subway fare to $10 has the advantage of making all bridges and tunnels free. It also puts the costs of the luxury of driving to work right on the backs of those who have always deserved to bear the largest burden: the poorest 90 percent of our citizens.

It’s not only the right thing to do for our drivers. It’s the American way.