MUTH’S TRUTHS
Uber, Lyft FBI Background Checks Worthy of Discussion
even for Free-Marketers
Although I supported
legalizing “ride-sharing” in Nevada during last year’s legislative session, the
“Uber” bill that was ultimately passed was just plain horrible from a
conservative, free-market point of view – especially the new passenger tax on
not only ride-sharing services, but on taxis, as well.
But that’s not why
I’m writing today.
My position during
the last legislative session was that if a private citizen wishes to join a
private ride-sharing club like Uber and freely assumes all the risks associated
with using the service, that’s one thing.
But if those Uber
drivers are picking up fares from the general public who do not belong to the
ride-sharing network club, well, that’s another thing altogether. At that point community safety concerns come
into play. And according to a July 21,
2016 story in the Las Vegas Sun, that’s exactly what’s been happening since
ride-sharing was legalized last year.
“In February,”
reporter Daniel Rothberg wrote, “taxicab giant Bell Transportation hired a
private investigator who identified several illegal off-platform Uber and Lyft
rides – where drivers were paid cash rather than through the app – during a
convention.”
That’s a big
problem, even though Uber and Lyft don’t condone such behavior.
Nevertheless, it IS
occurring and lends credence to the taxi industry’s complaint that ride-sharing
operators aren’t subjected to the same stringent FBI background checks as taxi
drivers even though some of those drivers are picking up people off the street.
Rothberg reports
that Uber and Lyft oppose having their drivers undergo the same FBI background
checks as are required for taxi drivers because they “are typically more costly
and often take months longer to process.”
In fact, Uber and Lyft are so opposed to having their drivers be
required to pass an FBI background check they shut down their operations in
Austin, Texas in May after voters voted to require them.
Rothberg further
reports that during the 2015 legislative session Senate Minority Leader Aaron
Ford “pushed for language requiring Uber and Lyft to conduct FBI background
checks,” but that requirement “did not make it into the final bill.”
Ford is expected to
propose the FBI background checks again next session, but Assemblyman Derek
Armstrong has already voiced his opposition.
“Since the law has
been enacted,” Armstrong told Rothberg, “we haven’t seen any public safety
concerns that would lead me to believe it is as ripe as he (Ford) believes it
to be.”
Maybe he should
check out www.WhosDrivingYou.org.
The website,
admittedly sponsored by the taxi and limo association, chronicles all manner of
“incidents involving ‘ridesharing’ passengers being harmed and criminal
offenders behind the wheel.” The incident
categories include Deaths, Assaults, Sexual Assaults, Kidnappings, Felons,
Imposters and Driver DUIs.
Again, if Uber
drivers are only transporting Uber club members and the Uber club members are
willing to take the risk, that’s one thing.
But the very fact that some rogue ride-sharing drivers displaying Uber
and Lyft stickers in their windows are providing a public conveyance, that’s
another thing.
In addition, while
it’s one thing for the Uber member to be willing to take the risk, it’s another
thing for pedestrians and other motorists who haven’t agreed to that risk to be
put at risk. And indeed there are
multiple examples of Uber and Lyft drivers hitting pedestrians and other cars,
sometimes resulting in death.
That public safety
aspect of the issue is something I hadn’t fully considered last session.
I don’t know if
requiring the same FBI background checks for Uber and Lyft drivers as are
required for taxi drivers is the right thing to do or not. But I do know it’s a topic worthy of further
discussion in the next legislative session and folks such as Mr. Armstrong (if
he’s re-elected) should encourage such a debate, not try to shut it down.
Cheers.
Dr. Chuck Muth, PsD
Professor of
Psephology (homeschooled)
Publisher / Irritator-in-Chief
NEHLEN NEWS
- Ryan opponent: Trump 'shouldn't be beat up' about Khan family
- Paul Nehlen: Paul Ryan’s Betrayal of GOP Nominee Beneath Dignity of His Office, Morally Disqualifying
- Trump refuses to endorse Paul Ryan in GOP primary: ‘I’m just not quite there yet’
- Trump on supporting Paul Ryan: 'I'm not quite there yet'
- Trump declines to endorse Ryan in GOP primary
- Donald Trump Refuses to Endorse Paul Ryan
- Trump Refuses to Back Ryan in Primary
- Trump says not ready to back House Speaker Ryan
- DONALD TRUMP THREATENS PROXY WAR WITH PAUL RYAN
- Trump won't endorse Ryan
- Trump vs. Ryan (again)
- Trump refuses to endorse House Speaker Ryan; Ryan says he never asked
- Trump Withholds Endorsements for Paul Ryan
- Donald Trump won't endorse Paul Ryan in primary race
- Paul Ryan Primary Opponent at Heart of Proxy War Between Trump and GOP
- Donald Trump praises Paul Ryan's challenger, refuses to back speaker
- No, Donald Trump won't endorse Paul Ryan
- Donald Trump declines to endorse Paul Ryan
- Donald Trump twists the knife on Paul Ryan and John McCain
- Donald Trump Is Leaving Paul Ryan Out to Dry (Again)
- Donald Trump masterfully trolls Paul Ryan while refusing to endorse him in his primary
- Donald Trump Completes Total Humiliation of Paul Ryan by Refusing to Endorse Him
- Nehlen campaign reacts to Trump not endorsing Paul Ryan
- Nehlen: My Position on Education
- Paul Ryan Channeling John Mitchell in Constitution Photo Controversy
- Ryan Continues to Push for TPP at Koch Brothers’ Billionaire Bacchanal
- August 9 is Wisconsin’s “Independence Day” from Paul Ryan
No comments:
Post a Comment