Crazy Talk: In New Speech, Hochul Declares Dictatorial Powers, But Also Begs Legislature for Bailout

Gov. Hochul echoed infamous monarchs and dictators in world history at a Colorado think tank on Thursday night, claiming she had the power to singlehandedly pause implementation of the state law creating congestion pricing — but then, oddly, said it would be the state legislature's job to bail her out of the $15-billion transit funding hole she created.

In a "fireside chat" with the president of the august Aspen Institute, Hochul again defended her June 5 decision to "pause" the central business district tolls, using misinformation and channeling Louis XIV to do so.

"So, pause is a pause until I say it's not a pause," she told Aspen CEO Dan Porterfield in the chat. "I'm not being facetious, but we need some more time to structure. The legislature has to come back and find a solution. And we've got to be able to get another source of funding for at least partially."

Legislators in Albany could be forgiven for hearing that and saying, "Huh?" After all, then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo arm-twisted state lawmakers for several years before passing the law that created congestion pricing in 2019.

"The governor of New York doesn't command the arbitrary power of an absolute monarch like the Sun King, Louis XIV of France," said Danny Pearlstein, the spokesman for Riders Alliance. "The legislature wrote the law and the courts will interpret it. She created this mess and it's up to her to flip the switch and fix it."

In the conversation with Porterfield, Hochul also claimed that "no one" was talking about New York's economic or transportation challenges in 2019 when congestion pricing passed.

"Congestion pricing had been written into law back in 2019. I want to point out a few things that have changed," she said. "First of all, no one talked about the cost of living back then. Inflation was not a factor for families, it wasn't. We have high inflation now."

It is worth remembering that congestion pricing passed after the MTA suffered through a "Summer of Hell" that threatened to undermine the entire region's economy. And, indeed, then-Mayor John Lindsay, in supporting congestion pricing in the late 1960s, pointed out that, "Starving mass transit imposes costs that are difficult to measure, yet real. … Correcting the fiscal imbalance between transit and the automobile is key to enhancing our environment and quality of life," as Charles Komanoff pointed out in the Washington Spectator earlier this year.

More recently, the notion that "no one" was talking about our fragile economy in 2019 is patently absurd. Just google around and you will find such stories as, "The Economy Is Strong. So Why Do So Many Americans Still Feel at Risk?" (New York Times), "Housing affordability can be elusive for New Yorkers in urban, suburban and rural settings alike," (state Comptroller Tom DiNapoli), "These 3 Policy Failures Are Killing the American Dream," (New York Magazine).

No one talking? It seems like everyone was talking.

And, also countering Hochul's revisionist fantasy, a poll by Siena College Research released just before Hochul made her decision to kill congestion pricing, said New Yorkers' confidence in the economy was on the rise.

Worse, Hochul again lied about London's experience with congestion pricing in arguing that New York's now-scrubbed $15 peak toll "is too much to start."

"London, which everyone uses as their role model, started at £5 and over many years worked up to £15," she added.

It is true that London's initial congestion pricing toll was £5. But at today's exchange rate — and compensating for inflation over the 21 years since London initiated the charge — that £5 toll is the same as $14.09 in New York City today.

So our charge is too expensive, but the same charge in London was just fine?

The governor also mentioned theater-goers who she claimed would not return to the Great White Way, another bit of plutocratic populism that has been widely debunked:

Then she made all manner of promises that are nowhere near even the stage where preliminary discussions could be had about a concept around which a plan could perhaps be negotiated and then whittled down through compromise. For example:

• "I want to focus on congestion in the city and we'll get that done."
• "I want to continue funding the MTA."
• "I'm working with the MTA [which is] about to show me their next five-year capital plan ... which is going to be even higher that we'll find the funding sources for."

Regarding that last one, no one is optimistic because without congestion pricing, the MTA needs to find $15 billion for its current capital plan — and it still needs somewhere near $25 billion in new funding for the 2025-29 capital plan, the details of which the agency will reveal in September.

"You already have a financing problem for the next plan," Citizens Budget Commission President Andrew Rein previously told Streetsblog. "If you remove congestion pricing from the equation, your problem just got that much bigger for next time."

As such, the governor needs to act, said Rachael Fauss of Reinvent Albany.

"It's not up to the Governor's whims to decide when to move forward or not with congestion pricing," she said. "Congestion pricing is the law, and it is unlawful for the governor to cancel it. ... And the longer this goes on, the more uncertainty is created for the MTA's finances and the more expensive it will be to restart all of these projects."

Eric McClure of StreetsPAC, the only political action committee solely focused on safe streets and transit, added that there's a reason the governor is facing lawsuits to restart congestion pricing.

"We have faith that the courts will rule that the governor cannot pick and choose which laws to implement," he said.