A decade ago, Uber was the definition of tech disruption. Former CEO Travis Kalanick used to talk about “principled confrontation” with municipal governments—basically, don’t ask permission and launch the product. Consumers loved it, of course, because it gave them more choices for daily transportation, and it required politicians in major metros to think twice before defaulting to protectionism in favor of rather archaic taxi medallion schemes.
Today, Uber is the dominant force in the business of connecting and moving people, with 200 million monthly active users on its platform. Unfortunately, as often happens with once-rebellious outsiders, Uber is acting more like an entrenched incumbent, working to ensure that no innovations can disrupt its operations. Uber has sided with the taxi unions to try to slow down the launch of autonomous vehicles (AVs) in American cities.
In the spirit of what Harvey Dent warns Batman in Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight, Uber has lived long enough to become the villain.
Their New Jersey lobbyists have proposed rules requiring human drivers to provide at least 85% of rides during a three-year AV pilot program, and Uber has backed an outright ban on “robotaxis” in Washington, D.C. All of this, as an Atlanta driver union is pursuing a fee per AV ride to fund job transition programs for drivers. Riders will pay more.
Uber says it’s trying to protect workers and ensure a responsible transition to this new technology, but it’s easy to see that Uber is terrified of getting “Uber-ed” itself. It’s both ironic and typical.
Consumers should remember how Uber fought for their interests with the spread of ridesharing, and then ask the question: Why stop now?
The social upsides of AVs are enormous. These vehicles will provide more mobility options in communities that are poorly served by traditional transit, just as e-scooters and bikes have. Everyday transportation will become more affordable, and, most importantly, roads will become radically safer. 40,000 annual road fatalities in the U.S. is something we’ve learned to live with, and can leave in the past.
The technology isn’t perfect and will continue to be improved. However, where it currently stands is promising. According to Waymo data, its autonomous vehicles have driven more than 220 million miles, and riders are 94% less likely to be involved in a crash resulting in injury.
There is no other activity in which a reasonable person would decline a 94% reduction in their risk of harm, such as parachuting, flying, dining, or taking medicine. When it comes to getting around, driving or riding in a human-operated vehicle is one such choice most of us make each day for practical reasons.
There’s a world of difference between wanting to ensure a technology is safe and ensuring your more well-established company doesn’t face competition from it.
America’s autonomous vehicle policy is a regulatory maze. California requires separate approvals from the Department of Motor Vehicles to deploy a driverless vehicle and from the Public Utilities Commission to carry paying passengers; its testing rules also require $5 million in financial responsibility and detailed collision and disengagement reports. New York requires its own state testing permit, an additional $5 million insurance policy, and a licensed driver behind the wheel, while New York City adds a separate municipal permit. Florida, by contrast, expressly permits fully autonomous vehicles without a human driver and prevents local governments from imposing their own AV taxes, fees, permits, or operating requirements.
California is spending record billions on education. Where is the money going?
Nick Melvoin: LA ranks 93rd in park access. LAUSD already has a solution.
California’s overregulated job market is falling behind
Reflections on 9/11: A view from the White House
We used to celebrate people who built things. Now we tax them for it.
A vehicle that can operate commercially in Miami may therefore encounter an entirely different set of permissions, personnel requirements, and operating restrictions in Los Angeles or New York. This is workable for the ride-hailing business, but it completely hamstrings America from maximizing the benefits of trucking goods across state lines.
Technological progress doesn’t stop just because a single company isn’t ready for it, and, frankly, resisting that tech makes companies like Uber worse in the long run. Consumers flocked to their service for convenience, not to make an altruistic statement about taxi unions. Once riders try autonomous vehicles, particularly riders who don’t feel safe in a car of any kind with a stranger, many never want to go back.
Innovate or become irrelevant. That’s the American economy in a nutshell. It’s understandable that Uber and other ridesharing companies are rattled by how quickly AVs have become safe and workable in major cities, but it’s another thing entirely to use union tactics and embrace an anti-consumer position about who gets to enter the marketplace.
James Czerniawski is the Head of Emerging Technology Policy at the Consumer Choice Center. Follow him on X @JamesCz19.