The promise of congestion pricing

BY DAVID KING, MICHAEL MANVILLE AND DONALD SHOUP

The federal government has offered Los Angeles County $213 million to convert carpool lanes into congestion-priced toll lanes. This makes transportation economists happy, but paying a toll to travel on congestion-free roads during peak traffic hours has always been a tough sell politically.

Congestion pricing can reduce traffic, air pollution and carbon emissions, but it is also a fundamental change in the way we think about and provide space for driving. So no one should be surprised that most drivers resist it.

While drivers may come to appreciate (or at least tolerate) priced roads, we should not expect them to like the idea beforehand. The dilemma facing congestion pricing is not, however, simply that opposition is too high; it is also that support is too low. Drivers argue against pricing; who argues for it?

Here is a proposal to create political support for congestion pricing on urban freeways: Distribute the toll revenue to all the cities traversed by freeways. With the revenue as a prize, local elected officials can become the political champions of congestion pricing.

Cities can benefit greatly from congestion pricing. If congestion tolls were charged on all the freeways in Los Angeles County, and the revenue returned to the 66 cities traversed by those freeways, each city would receive an estimated $500 per capita per year.

Cities also have the power to make road pricing a reality. With their lobbyists and elected officials, cities can be effective advocates for congestion pricing. And because local officials are accountable to their residents, they have an incentive to spend the toll revenues in ways their residents support.

Moreover, the many different cities in the region can spend the revenue in many different ways. Some cities might spend the money on road improvements, others on fixing sidewalks, still others on affordable housing.

This approach will build more political support than will spending the money on a single large program.

A study of congestion tolls for Los Angeles estimated that higher-income motorists will pay most of the tolls — largely because they own more cars and do more driving. The tolls they pay can fund added public services for low-income people in cities with freeways.

Congestion pricing is L.A.'s best hope in its seemingly endless war against traffic. But the prospect of federal money is unlikely, by itself, to convince the region to adopt pricing on a large scale. Powerful, local, organized groups must believe that they can benefit from congestion prices.

We believe cities, motivated by the prospect of toll revenue, can lobby to make pricing a reality, and will spend the revenue in a way that makes many people better off. Along the way, we can reduce congestion and improve the environment.

King and Manville are Ph.D. candidates in urban planning. Shoup, a professor of urban planning, is the author of "The High Cost of Free Parking." To read a longer version of this op-ed, go here.