logo
New York's business boosters push Trump to keep Manhattan tolls

New York's business boosters push Trump to keep Manhattan tolls

Politico11-02-2025

NEW YORK — New York City's business community is trying to make a deal on congestion tolls with the city's most famous businessperson.
President Donald Trump pledged during his campaign to kill the new fee to enter Manhattan's business district during his first week in office. But even as he continues to publicly toy with plans to eliminate federal approval of the $9 tolls, he's hesitating — thereby creating an opening for a persuasion campaign to either box him in or bargain.
The Partnership for New York City, a leading business consortium that includes CEOs of Pfizer and Tishman Speyer, is trying to salvage the policy known as congestion pricing by using classic Republican arguments about taxes, cutting red tape and states rights.
'In every respect, this is a policy that President Trump and the Republicans should be supporting,' Kathy Wylde, the industry group's leader, said Monday on WNYC.
And so on one of the most contentious issues in the tristate area these days, Trump finds himself stuck between the business elites and the anti-toll Republicans who comprise his suburban New York base. Among the latter are Reps. Mike Lawler and Nicole Malliotakis.
'I'm glad some folks in the business community who have a different relationship to Donald Trump than I do are reaching out to say, 'You like a deal, this is a great deal. Don't fuck it up,'' said Brad Lander, the New York City comptroller and left-leaning Democratic candidate for mayor.
For a Democratic-dominated city, business leaders can be a powerful counterweight to arguments that the tolls have hurt working-class people. Private-sector boosters are more likely to appeal to Trump's business sense than left-flank politicians and mass transit advocates who support the tolls.
'The concept of congestion pricing — a market-based Republican principle — is that you're not just raising taxes,' Wylde said in an interview. She also noted the idea emerged from conservative think tanks as a preferable alternative to fund transit than raising taxes.
As the pro-congestion pricing argument from the business class takes shape, one validator came in the form of a Daily News op-ed from DJ Gribbin, a former special assistant to Trump on infrastructure policy, who urged the president to let congestion pricing play out for a year and make adjustments later if necessary. Gribbin gave his own pointed anecdote about how much better traffic is now.
'My Uber from LaGuardia Airport to Midtown (not far from Trump Tower) took 29 minutes, about two-thirds the usual time,' he wrote.
The money from the new tolls, which have been in place since January, are meant to fund billions of dollars in upgrades to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's aging bus and subway system. A 2023 deal to keep the MTA afloat post-pandemic was paid for using higher business taxes.
Wylde is not the only one to sound such notes. While curbing traffic was always the point of the plan, many toll supporters spent years focusing on its air quality benefits.
Now, even the head of the MTA — a public transit system in a blue city within a blue state — is talking like a Republican.
Since Election Day, MTA CEO Janno Lieber has tossed out a variety of arguments making it seem like congestion pricing is either a no-brainer for a guy who cares about New York City real estate like Trump does or a tricky thing for a true conservative to undo.
Lieber said he recently talked with Ed Cox, the chair of the state's Republican Party, about how even red states should be worried about arbitrary federal decision making. The tolling program was approved in the final weeks of the Biden administration using a legal mechanism similar to one relied on by toll road operators in GOP-run Texas and Florida.
It's an argument — like so much in the Trump era — that is ultimately directed at an audience of one. The president has called congestion pricing 'really horrible' but has also spoken repeatedly with Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul in her bid to secure a potential deal that would walk back the tolls and provide more funding for New York City infrastructure. Those talks remain ongoing.
Lieber recently told reporters in Albany, 'I'm confident she is making the case effectively, however she's doing it, that congestion pricing is a net benefit.'
Some business leaders have half-joked about putting Trump's name on major infrastructure projects, like the Gateway Tunnel. More seriously, they have tried to appeal to a perceived desire to be remembered for major accomplishments.
'It clearly would entice him,' said New York Building Congress President Carlo Scissura. 'But I think even more importantly than naming something after him, he can be the president who said we rebuilt the greatest transit system in the world. Now you're talking real results that the president really likes.'
Perhaps the most effective argument is that congestion pricing is increasingly popular.
Wylde's group waved around polling by Morning Consult that found six in 10 New York voters want Trump to keep congestion pricing, with support for the tolls higher among New Yorkers who actually paid the tolls.
That is giving congestion pricing boosters reasons to think Trump may not follow through on his pledge last May on social media to 'TERMINATE Congestion Pricing in my FIRST WEEK back in Office!!'
'This is going to be a popular thing, and Trump does popular things,' said Joe Colangelo, the CEO of private bus company Boxcar.
Colangelo is virtually a unicorn in the congestion pricing fight — a Republican-aligned business owner in New Jersey whose company was positively name checked during the recent Republican gubernatorial debate.
Opponents of the toll have argued it hurts working-class commuters in an increasingly unaffordable city, and the criticism has cut across political affiliations. New Jersey is not the first place to seek out congestion pricing lovers, as Gov. Phil Murphy has sued to block the program. In doing so he's made himself a thorn in fellow Democrat Hochul's side.
Queens Assemblymember David Weprin, a Democrat who signed onto a lawsuit to block the tolls, has argued the party will be hurt by keeping the program in place.
'I don't think it should be a crime to drive a car,' Weprin said. 'You're going to find it's hurting small businesses in Manhattan.'
But Colangelo, whose company carries over 1,500 people in and out of New York City each day, is seeing the benefits — travel times so much quicker he said it's 'like running buses in Wichita.'
His arguments for the tolls are rooted, like Wylde's, in tax policy and like Lieber's, in predictability. Last summer, after Hochul 'paused' congestion pricing amid congressional elections, Colangelo wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal calling her decision 'mystifying' and said companies can't succeed amid an 'unpredictable, whims-based rule-making process.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘Come and get me': Gavin Newsom has entered the meme war
‘Come and get me': Gavin Newsom has entered the meme war

Washington Post

time26 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

‘Come and get me': Gavin Newsom has entered the meme war

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has found himself in the center of the internet's spotlight after squaring off with President Donald Trump on social media over the deployment of military troops to counter protesters in Los Angeles. While police deployed tear gas and shot at protesters in Los Angeles with rubber bullets on Monday, Newsom shared a screenshot on TikTok of a Washington Post headline reporting that California would sue Trump over the National Guard's presence, paired with a trending sound sampled from the movie 'Mean Girls. ' The video was captioned 'We will not stand while Donald Trump illegally federalizes the National Guard' and was liked more than 255,000 times.

Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, U.S. Appeals court decides
Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, U.S. Appeals court decides

Yahoo

time26 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, U.S. Appeals court decides

By Dietrich Knauth (Reuters) -A federal appeals court allowed President Donald Trump's most sweeping tariffs to remain in effect on Tuesday while it reviews a lower court decision blocking them on grounds that Trump had exceeded his authority by imposing them. The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. means Trump may continue to enforce, for now, his "Liberation Day" tariffs on imports from most U.S. trading partners, as well as a separate set of tariffs levied on Canada, China and Mexico. The appeals court has yet to rule on whether the tariffs are permissible under an emergency economic powers act that Trump cited to justify them, but it allowed the tariffs to remain in place while the appeals play out. The tariffs, used by Trump as negotiating leverage with U.S. trading partners, and their on-again, off-again nature have shocked markets and whipsawed companies of all sizes as they seek to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. The ruling has no impact on other tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled on May 28 that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress, not the president, the power to levy taxes and tariffs, and that the president had exceeded his authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law intended to address "unusual and extraordinary" threats during national emergencies. The Trump administration quickly appealed the ruling, and the Federal Circuit in Washington put the lower court decision on hold the next day while it considered whether to impose a longer-term pause. The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small U.S. businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 12 U.S. states. Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under IEEPA. The 1977 law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the U.S. or freeze their assets. Trump is the first U.S. president to use it to impose tariffs. Trump has said that the tariffs imposed in February on Canada, China and Mexico were to fight illegal fentanyl trafficking at U.S. borders, denied by the three countries, and that the across-the-board tariffs on all U.S. trading partners imposed in April were a response to the U.S. trade deficit. The states and small businesses had argued the tariffs were not a legal or appropriate way to address those matters, and the small businesses argued that the decades-long U.S. practice of buying more goods than it exports does not qualify as an emergency that would trigger IEEPA. At least five other court cases have challenged the tariffs justified under the emergency economic powers act, including other small businesses and the state of California. One of those cases, in federal court in Washington, D.C., also resulted in an initial ruling against the tariffs, and no court has yet backed the unlimited emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed. Errore nel recupero dei dati Effettua l'accesso per consultare il tuo portafoglio Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati

Judge tosses lawsuit over Trump's firing of US African Development Foundation board members
Judge tosses lawsuit over Trump's firing of US African Development Foundation board members

Associated Press

time27 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

Judge tosses lawsuit over Trump's firing of US African Development Foundation board members

A federal judge has tossed out a lawsuit over President Donald Trump's dismantling of a U.S. federal agency that invests in African small businesses. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon in Washington, D.C., dismissed the case on Tuesday, finding that Trump was acting within his legal authority when he fired the U.S. African Development Foundation's board members in February. In March, the same judge ruled that the administration's removal of most grant money and staff from the congressionally created agency was also legal, as long as the agency was maintained at the minimum level required by law. USADF was created as an independent agency in 1980, and its board members must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. In 2023, Congress allocated $46 million to the agency to invest in small agricultural and energy infrastructure projects and other economic development initiatives in 22 African countries. On Feb. 19, Trump issued an executive order that said USADF, the U.S. Institute of Peace, the Inter-American Foundation and the Presidio Trust should be scaled back to the minimum presence required by law. At the time, USADF had five of its seven board seats filled. A few days later, an administration official told Ward Brehm that he was fired, and emails were sent to the other board members notifying them that they had also been terminated. Those emails were never received, however, because they were sent to the wrong email addresses. The four board members, believing they still held their posts because they had not been given notice, met in March and passed a resolution appointing Brehm as the president of the board. But Trump had already appointed Pete Marocco as the new chairman of what the administration believed to now be a board of one. Since then, both men have claimed to be the president of the agency, and Brehm filed the lawsuit March 6. Leon said that even though they didn't receive the emails, the four board members were effectively terminated in February, and so they didn't have the authority to appoint Brehm to lead the board. An attorney for Brehm did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Another lawsuit over the dismantling of the agency is still pending before the same judge. In that case, two USADF staffers and a consulting firm based in Zambia that works closely with USADF contend that the Trump administration's efforts to deeply scale back the agency wrongly usurps Congress' powers. They also say Marocco was unlawfully appointed to the board, in part because he was never confirmed by the Senate as required. Leon's ruling in Brehm's case did not address whether the Trump administration had the power to install Marocco as board chair on a temporary basis.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store