Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rideshare Safety Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel advances rideshare safety bill after emotional survivor testimony and negotiated changes
Summary
After survivor testimony and hours of debate, the House Business, Labor & Employment Committee voted 11–2 to advance HB 12‑91, a broad rideshare safety bill that calls for strengthened driver identity verification, more reporting to regulators and new consumer protections; sponsors removed fingerprinting and narrowed some requirements during committee amendments.
The Business, Labor & Employment Committee advanced House Bill 12‑91 after hours of testimony and several sponsor amendments. The measure, prompted by multiple survivors’ accounts of assaults they said occurred in rideshare vehicles, would require enhanced identity verification of drivers, increased data reporting to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), account-holder verification for rides involving teens, and other safety-related provisions.
Representative Wilford, the bill’s lead sponsor, described her own assault and said the industry’s voluntary safety measures have not done enough. Survivors and victim-advocacy groups gave emotional testimony describing kidnappings, drugging, and ****** assaults that they allege involved drivers or profiles on rideshare platforms. Many witnesses said current platform controls — profile photos, matching by plate/license, and in-app reporting — are insufficient to prevent account sharing and impersonation by people who pose as authorized drivers.
The bill originally included fingerprint-based background checks and other measures; during committee negotiations sponsors removed the fingerprint requirement (amendment L6) and excluded specialized school-based transportation provider HopSkipDrive (amendments L4/L5). Sponsor Froelich told the committee the fingerprint removal resolved fiscal and equity objections raised by opponents and eliminated a state cash-fund fiscal exposure. Sponsors also adopted an amendment that shortened a proposed DUI disqualification window from seven to three years (L2).
Commercial platforms (Uber, Lyft) opposed several draft provisions. Company witnesses said they already operate multiple safety features — real-time ID checks (selfie verification), continuous background monitoring, PIN verification, in-app emergency tools, and optional audio/video recording — and said some bill provisions (broad mandatory audio/video capture without opt-out, a private right of action and consumer-protection penalties) could create privacy issues, litigation risk and operational conflicts with federal arbitration law. Industry witnesses also said existing third-party background checks can exceed the accuracy of fingerprint/Arrest-based databases and that some bill enforcement provisions overlap with recent state law on deactivation and appeals.
Committee sponsors said they had narrowed the proposal and would keep working on details; after testimony and amendment votes the committee moved the amended bill to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation. The committee recorded an 11–2 roll-call in favor.
