Seattle Restricts Uber and Transportation Innovation

American Legislative Exchange Council ^ | 3-19-14 | John Stephenson

[ThethoughtsofGreg]

In a major setback for innovation in the urban transportation market, the Seattle City Council voted Monday to cap the number of cars that ride-on-demand services like Uber and Lyft may have on the road at any one time. The mayor of Seattle, Ed Murray, has said he will sign it.

Under a new ordinance, which is the first of its kind in the United States, companies like Uber, Lyft, and Sidecar will be limited to having 150 cars each on the road at a time. This means that ride-on-demand services will collectively have no more than 450 cars on the road at a time, which is significantly less than the 2,000 cars they claim to have on the streets of Seattle right now.

[Gen.Blather]

I didn’t see it in this article, but my understanding is this is a tax problem. The new services mean less gas taxes and a drop in taxi income and probably fees.

When the Greens insisted on energy efficiency the power companies were induced to help people put in insulation and buy more efficient appliances. It worked so well the power company revenue dropped so the regulators allowed them to increase prices to make up for the losses. There are unintended consequences for every idiot scheme.

[RetiredTexasVet]

The communists are lawless so laws like the “law of unintended consequences” don’t really apply to them ... yes, they are working on gravity now!

[Turbopilot]

Not really. Drivers have to pay taxes on their incomes just like any other independent businesses. These bills are supported by the taxi monopolies who know that virtually any alternative is better than their poor, outdated service and don’t want to have to compete. We had similar legislation come up in Georgia but we managed to kill it for this year.

[Steve_Seattle]

I don’t think this is a tax issue. I think gasoline taxes are collected by the state, not the city. I think it’s just a case of liberals being liberals and banning everything that rubs them the wrong way, for whatever reason.

[terycarl]

and they are going to enforce this law how??????

[logitech]

When people finally come to the inescapable conclusion that the “leaders” are a clear and present danger to their survival, it’s gonna be too late.

Sounds like something Cicero would say.

There is nothing new under the sun.

[Ramius]

It’s absolutely just cronyism to benefit the taxi drivers. It erects a new barrier to entry for a service that competes directly (and effectively) with taxis.

This is a corrupt action by the city, pure and simple. They need to call it out for what it is. The whole municipal licensing system needs to be thrown out by a court someplace. The only reason it exists is to restrict the market and protect existing “friends” of the city government from encroachment by newer, cheaper, and more efficient competition.