Should cities implement congestion pricing to reduce traffic in busy urban areas?

No, traffic always happens and it sometimes the result of traffic lights or bad weather and people shouldn’t be punished for things that are out of their control.

I think that residents of urban areas should be free from being charged but nonresidents should pay. But also if you work in urban areas it should be part of your job deal to get like a pass to come through

if cities wanted to reduce congestion they should not charge people for it, rather they should widen the roads and put an emphasis on things like carpooling to also help reduce polution.

This would just allow only the wealthy to travel in these areas, while the poorer people couldn't. Thus increasing to gap between the upper and lower class. But there should just be public transportation available to encourage public transportation use, over personal vehicle use.

Yes. However, also implement some kind of pass the driver can purchase as to be more financially economical to the locals.

No. Instead cities should remove parking garages from central areas and increase walkability and public transportation that naturally decongests urban areas with cars.

As long as it is done in conjunction with the federal reserve subsidizing alternative transportation

I don't think a penalty parameter like this is as appropriate as incentivizing traveling in group means or by using public transport. However, I could see the application if it's tied to transportation vehicle emissions

invest more in high speed rail to limit the number of cars on the road and implement parking control

Heavy traffic should not be near densely populated areas, but cars should also not be charged for using public transportation infrastructure.

Yes, but only after more investment into our public transportation system along with investing in mix-use zoning to work on reducing traffic.

Cities shouldn't implement congestion pricing because it ignites and old rift between Drivers vs. Transit riders.

Yes, as long as public transportation is free or very low cost to citizens and there is enough public transportation for the whole city

Depends on the underlying source of congestion. If the underlying cause is for hire vehicles (like NYC), reduce the number of FHV.

No, but the roads should be privatized and the private companies will likely implement different tolls and pricing mechanisms for different circumstances

No. Congestion pricing is a way for wealthy neighborhoods to impose an "entry tax" against the poor and working class. It also allows irresponsible city governments to fleece voters who are the most in need to pay for their irresponsible nonsense. If we want to reduce congestion, let's tax the wealthy in those neighborhoods to create better traffic flows and let's start enforcing the law against pedestrians who jaywalk and disregard traffic rules.

Yes, only if locals and commuters into congestion pricing zones get a giant discount, or get into the congestion pricing zone for free because of their residency.

No because this tax will heavily burden low income commuters who need to travel long distances for work.

A higher price charging driver's, will push people to use more public transportation, Wich will lead to less carbon emissions being released.

No, because it's not fair to anyone else. If they do it in one area, then no, it should be all areas. Also this isn't really important. Not nessecary.

While there is a a growing body of literature that suggest that congestion pricing is effective, it serves as a de facto tax that passes the cost of poor infrastructure planning on to drivers.

No. While I acknowledge the literature that demonstrates its effectiveness, it represents a backdoor tax.

Congestion pricing may be a reasonable tactic, but by market forces, not government dictates. Government cannot economically calculate the appropriate pricing.

Yes but then they also need to build free-to-park parking garages (not lots. NOT LOTS) where these areas begin. As someone traveling from far outside congested areas I Have to go in by car, but these tolls add up and aren't always affordable. Pay for the garages with the congestion prison funds.

No; they should implement Artificially Intelligent Personal Light Rail Travel Systems and other means of dealing with the congestion.

Cities should not be prevented from implementing policies consistent with local will and prevailing law.

Yes, but only if there are adaquate public transport to meet the needs of more people using it due to congestion

Should improve public transportation before instead of punishing people for driving in crucial areas.

Prioritize implementing free, clean, well maintained, and easily accessible public transportation and then congestion will no longer be an issue.

Cities should be free to implement their own tax or fee structures to fund their roads/transportation systems.

Possibly depending on individual areas and decided by local government. But subject to federal funding or withholding of federal funding if necessary.

Highly populated areas need to have public transportation that is affordable for people and affordable for tax payers to manage

No, but incentivise:: offer tax benefits to those who use public transportation, offer work from home days that work with company policy,

this seems like a good way to reduce pollution but i think the only way it would work is if we lowered the price of public transportation to make it more accessible to lower income individuals.

No, implement better road and street designs (i.e. optical narrowing and no stroads) to reduce traffic

No, because most people will find alternate routes either way, and congestion may shift to other locations.

Depends on the city and the congestion. This tax should be utilized to increase public transportation e.g. trains

Yes, but only if they are willing to provide more reliable and free or low priced public transportation.

No, this only ends up harming working people who have been forced out of city cores. A better option is investing in public transportation and human centered urban design.

Yes, but make it at an affordable amount relative to the city's borough/neighborhood lowest median GDP per capita

Have a clear plan to reinvest on public transportation

No, increase spending on public transportation instead

Yes but adjust the pricing based on income instead of it being a flat rate.

No, traffic is a common flow at sometimes reduces the risk of of accidents.

I feel that it should be added for private transportation, but not for commercial vehicles like trucks and things that transport public goods and it should neither charge public transportation as it also helps reduce traffic

Just follow the law, drive the speed limit, and there will be no traffic. Most traffic happens because of accidents. I understand that accidents like hydroplaning can occur, but driving too fast on the highway, not paying attention because you're on your phone, or driving while drunk is against the law, and people continue to break them. It's their fault, and the traffic won't stop until they follow the law.

It is already implemented within places in California where we have toll roads on highways.

Yes but taxi drivers and rideshare drivers should be given passes that do not penalize the driver but the company. Also, free public transport should be more accessible and safer for lower-income drivers.

Only charge the new builds in the area. Don’t punish owners that have been in the area before congestion occurred