[varelaseb]

This is the most econ-brained response possible. Why would the success of a public policy be exclusively defined by revenue generated?

[ses1984]

Because it’s based on the assumption that congestion didn’t actually go down, see number 1 posted by op.

If you want congestion to go down, keep raising the price. It will eventually go down and revenue could go up a lot.

[bluGill]

Or you get voted out of office and your charges reversed down to zero - or perhaps negative as the people are so mad they take it out on the transit this was supposed to fund.

Politics is tricky, don't take so much you make people affected mad enough to undo what you wanted.

[Rastonbury]

Big econ brained is thinking about whether the congestion pricing is approximately captures the negative externalities of traffic

[blehn]

First, it's not exclusively defined by revenue (which is what my first point was alluding to). Second, the underlying assumption of revenue generated is that it's going to the MTA and used to improve public transit and therefore quality of life in the city, which would be a success.