And why is it controversial/contentious(like NYC for example)?
In: Economics
The idea is to reduce traffic (and exhaust emissions) in urban areas by reducing the number of vehicles commuting into the cities. Rather than try to enact and enforce a set limit to the number and/or types of vehicles, the government charges high tolls/fees to enter the city. Those high transportation costs limit the number of vehicles entering the city, as many choose less-expensive public-transit options like trains and busses.
In some places, like NYC, it is controversial in great part due to the fact that many people commute into the city from out of state (such as from nearby New Jersey). Congestion pricing costs NJ commuters money, which goes into NY tax coffers. It also affects businesses, such as NJ companies that provide goods or services to NYC but must travel into the city by car/truck. (You can’t expect an HVAC tech to bring a whole truck full of tools on the bus.) Thus, the people of NJ complain that NYC’s congestion pricing is hurting NJ residents.
In sum, congestion pricing can reduce urban traffic congestion, as it’s designed to do, but it also has the effect of financially hurting some groups of people to the benefit of others.
Latest Answers