In a recently released a paper
about the “sharing economy,” Free State Foundation President, Randolph May, and
myself discussed the positive impact many new sharing companies have had on consumers.
Yet, despite the innovative ideas and entrepreneurial activity generated by
companies like Airbnb and Uber, some states and municipalities have attempted
to restrict or ban their services. Often, these attempts are instigated by
lobbying from hotel and taxicab companies which have lost profit to these new
entrants.
The latest news comes from California, where a bill
was recently voted on that would profoundly limit ridesharing services provided
by companies like Uber, Lyft and Sidecar. One State Senator voted
in favor of the bill only to be arrested for drunk driving several hours later.
While there is no serious data that shows that these new ridesharing services
have caused a reduction in DUIs, a
Washington Post story
suggests that in areas where the service is legal, there is a negative correlation
between ridesharing and DUIs. In other words, as ridesharing increases, DUI
arrests decrease. It seems intuitive that allowing for more competition in the
transportation market would lower prices and encourage potentially intoxicated
individuals to share rides instead of driving.
It is ironic that a politician
who enjoys a few drinks would vote to restrict ridesharing services that could
clearly benefit him.
Posts
