The NY Times editorial board continues to misconstrue issues, as they also continue in exhibiting a gross disrespect for the tax paying citizens of the city (while simultaneously enjoying lavish tax breaks for the new Times headquarters). The editorial today on congestion pricing is a case in point. It urges law makers to hurry back to Albany next month and approve the mayor's plan, or else risk losing millions in federal aid.
This, as we have pointed out, is simply not true. There not only is no deadline, there is likely no federal money either: it is all a chimera conjured up by a starry eyed mayor who has miraculously turned green before our very eyes. The Times compounds its errors by alleging that approval of the mayor's plan would prevent the transit fare from increasing, "maybe as much as 50 percent." Maybe the Times will next tell us that the congestion tax scheme will be a cure for ED as well.
Fortunately, not every one listens to the salons at the Times. In today's NY Sun, Councilman David Weprin lashes out at the mayor's plan, and underscores the hypocritical use of poor children and asthma as a selling point: "What I find equally disingenuous about the proposal is the argument that congestion pricing would be good for the environment. In fact, it does nothing to address the prevalence of background pollutants found with greater frequency in areas such as Long Island City, East Harlem, Bed-Stuy, the South Bronx, and Jamaica."
The Post's Fred Dicker puts this story into the proper perspective when he points out that Governor Spitzer, failing to exercise proper due diligence over the mayor's plan, "has turned his administration into an extension of city hall" (something that the Times has been doing for the past five years). All of which makes making a deal harder to envision next month.