Though a Quinnipiac University poll released last week reported that citywide opposition to congestion pricing rose to 57% (from 52% in July), potentially misleading language and a failure to inform respondents of the details of New York’s proposed congestion pricing plan bring the poll’s validity into question.Transportation Alternatives noted that the poll language implied congestion fees would be levied all day (in fact, drivers would be charged on weekdays between 6 am and 6 pm) and did not mention that congestion pricing was a pilot program. The poll also failed to mention that the congestion fee would be charged only once a day or that tolls would be deducted from the $8 fee. The poll did not ask respondents how familiar they were with congestion pricing.Most egregiously, pollsters did not tell respondents that congestion pricing revenues would be dedicated to improving mass transit. People are more willing to pay fees or taxes if they know their money is going to tangible improvements. A May 2006 Tri-State Campaign poll found that New Yorkers supported and opposed congestion pricing about equally—44% were in favor and 45% against (MTR # 544).Interestingly, support for congestion pricing on Staten Island rose from 26% in May to 39% in the most recent poll. Staten Islanders who commute via the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge would not pay a congestion fee, as it would be completely offset by the $9 bridge toll.Historically, congestion pricing has proved popular once it is tried. Four-fifths of Stockholm residents opposed congestion pricing in a survey done prior to its implementation, but ultimately voted to make the plan permanent in a referendum held 7 months after the plan began. A Transport for London survey conducted three years after the implementation of pricing found that pricing supporters outnumbered those opposed two to one.