Austin Prop 1

[RiverRat1]

For or against?

And why is this such a huge deal? Someone is spending TONS of money on TV ads saying "Vote yes for Prop 1"

[Flint knapper]

What does it say??????

[Stoof]

I'm voting for.
First city council sucks.
Second I'm a free market kinda guy.


The more I learn about people, the more I like my dog.

- Mark Twain

[Epack]

FOR,

The last thing the city needs is its hands in one more honey pot, sick of the politics in this ultra blue county. Glad I live in the county to the north.

[tradtiger]

Uber doesn't want to fingerprint based background checks for potential drivers. If this passes they won't have to; they can keep doing name or social security based checks as they have been doing. Slightly worrisome, though, that they are spending so much over this.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[RiverRat1]

Well well well... Now it's making sense... I figured it was a scam of some kind after only seeing the TV ads saying to vote yes.. Which made it appear it was for the safety of the people. I originally thought it was the city pushing Prop 1, but it's Uber. And if it passes it's actually less safe LOL Geez...

I'd still vote for it because we don't need to regulate more stuff. If it's not safe enough let the people choose to use something else.

[Patton]

I'm for the ridesharing companies.

Uber Austin’s General Manager Marco McCottry says of 163 Austin cab drivers who applied to Uber, 53 “were prevented from partnering with Uber due to failing Uber’s background check process,” McCottry wrote in the memo obtained by KXAN News. Further, 19 of those 53 were rejected “because of a recent serious offense (conviction). Crimes included felony assaults, DWIs and a hit and run.”
- http://kxan.com/2015/10/27/uber-driv...issued-permit/

That says 53 licensed chauffeurs in Austin (Cab Drivers) aren't eligible to drive for Uber because they can't pass Uber's background checks- even though the city thinks they are safe to drive the cabs.

[Tx.Fisher]

If you vote for it you're against background checks? Or is it the other way around?? Honestly I don't know. A guy called in to KLBJ and said he went in to early vote, and the wording on the ballot was so confusing that he backed out. Did not vote and said he needed to study the issue more. The city is intentionally making this incredibly confusing.

[RiverRat1]

If you vote for it your against background checks? Or is it the other way around?? Honestly I don't know. A guy called in to KLBJ and said he went in to early vote, and the wording on the ballot was so confusing that he backed out. Did not vote and said he needed to study the issue more. The city is intentionally making this incredibly confusing.

This is why I started this thread. I think I have it figured out now..maybe

Uber is paying for the TV ads. If you vote FOR Prop 1, Uber will not be required to do the fingerprint checks for drivers. Other background checks remain the same. If you vote against, then the city somehow gets there hand in the pot..

[Tmag]

Our background checks are national database with DL and SS#, it gives us all we need to know.
Only thing I see is City gets paid and maybe an unsolved crime catches a perp

[kyle1974]

Uber is a multi Billion dollar company, participating in an industry, attempting to skirt every existing rule on the books when it comes to pay for hire ride services.

I listened to arguments a few weeks ago, and literally had no idea cab companies have to jump through so many hoops in order to work. DOT physicals, background checks, 2 way radios, GPS trackers.... and Uber is raking in regulation free billions while saying "we're just the napster of taxi cabs".

IF they do anything, they should relax the regulations on cab companies so they can fairly compete against uber, and it's based on quality of service, not volume of regulation.

and just for the record, I've never taken an Uber ride, and can't recall the last time I took a taxi..

[KenWood]

This kinda stuff is why I moved to Llano.

[LonghornTX]

Taxi unions vs. free market economics. But, I do agree that regulations should be relaxed for the taxi cabs.

I voted for prop. 1.

[RiverRat1]

You're right Kyle it's totally absurd what ALL companies have to pay in hidden fees. I don't wonder anymore why stuff (anything) costs so much after owning my own business.

I don't blame Uber one bit. IMO other companies (Taxi's in this case) are ticked off and jealous because the way they're set up they can't get around the costs Uber can.

[bobc]

Uber is a multi Billion dollar company, participating in an industry, attempting to skirt every existing rule on the books when it comes to pay for hire ride services.

I listened to arguments a few weeks ago, and literally had no idea cab companies have to jump through so many hoops in order to work. DOT physicals, background checks, 2 way radios, GPS trackers.... and Uber is raking in regulation free billions while saying "we're just the napster of taxi cabs".

IF they do anything, they should relax the regulations on cab companies so they can fairly compete against uber, and it's based on quality of service, not volume of regulation.

and just for the record, I've never taken an Uber ride, and can't recall the last time I took a taxi..

I have taken quite a few Uber rides.....taxis are now dead to me. Much better service and nicer rides. If their rating falls below a 4.6 out of 5, they get dropped.