While the News' embrace of differential time-of-day tolls is a welcome one, the piece doesn't add up. First, discounted commuter tokens or EZ Passes run against the logic of congestion pricing, since they make rush-hour car commuting cheaper than incidental bridge crossing. Second, as the News writers at once admit and reject, for congestion pricing to work, tokens will have to be phased out in favor of EZ Passes. It's left vague whether the News would back a peak period toll premium or only supports off-peak discounts. Reportedly, the request-for-proposals for the MTA pricing study does not limit analysis to off-peak toll discount policies.

The Jan. 6 U.S. News & World Report takes a somewhat more cogent look. U.S. News calls the following transportation strategies "more politically palatable than they are effective" at containing mounting national gridlock: building more roads; improving mass transit; developing "smart" cars and highways. Congestion pricing, on the other hand, could save roadway expansion funds, provide a stronger incentive to use transit and unclog the roads. Still, the political hurdles of making Americans pay for something they've long gotten for free are big ones. The article points to recent data from the new toll lanes (alongside regular "Freeway" lanes) on Calif. Freeway 91, for signs that some of the barriers are eroding. A recent study found that users of the toll lanes come from all income brackets. "For some working parents, a $2.50 toll is preferable to steep overtime charges for day care. The fast lanes also are popular with independent contractors and other workers who are paid by the job." If the system were public (the 91 Express Toll lanes were built by a private company), the tolls for lower-income commuters could be partially subsidized.