Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Poll: 84 percent of Chicagoans want minimum wage hiked to $13 an hour
Next Post: AG Madigan files blistering motion against Rutherford accuser
Posted in:
* From a press release…
Bruce Rauner issued the following statement regarding the news that former campaign manager and top White House aide for President Obama David Plouffe is joining ride-sharing company Uber:
“David Plouffe’s first order of business should be to encourage Governor Pat Quinn to veto the anti-ride sharing bill pending right here in President Obama’s home state. Ride-sharing companies like Uber are exactly the type of innovative companies Illinois should be welcoming and recruiting - I know it and the President’s top people know it. Pat Quinn should know it too.”
* Except Rauner seemed quite confused about the bill earlier this summer…
For example, it requires chauffeur licenses for drivers who work more than 18 hours a week, Rauner said.
“That’s just a restraint of competition,” Rauner said. “That shouldn’t be necessary.”
How is that a restraint of competition if taxi drivers already have to get one of those licenses?
And…
He said some level of background checks for ride-sharing drivers “probably does make sense.” So does a certain level of insurance, though he didn’t have any coverage minimums in mind.
You want the bill vetoed, but don’t know how you’d make it better?
If a lobbyist walked into a legislator’s office with that attitude they’d be laughed out of the Statehouse.
* Basically, this is simply an attempt by Rauner to woo the younger, wealthier tech crowd in Chicago and put Quinn on the spot with that very same group. It’s not a bad move at all. I just wish he’d flesh out his position even a little bit beyond empty platitudes and sort out his contradictions.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 2:13 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Poll: 84 percent of Chicagoans want minimum wage hiked to $13 an hour
Next Post: AG Madigan files blistering motion against Rutherford accuser
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Rauner has demonstrated time and again there’s not a lot of depth beyond the campaign talking points.
Not very well-informed or quick on his feet when questioned. He either flails around in hyperbole or goes into a rope-a-dope of “detailed plan coming later.”
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 2:23 pm
===Basically, this is simply an attempt by Rauner to woo the younger, wealthier tech crowd in Chicago ===
If you pick a side, at least respect the reporters and voters enough to pretend you know the talking points if you don’t want to know the facts.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 2:36 pm
Pat Quinn can take away my guns, raise my taxes, waste a whole bunch of money on Dorothy Brown’s husband, have 1,000s of patronage hires at IDOT, screw up every aspect of government and I would still consider him a decent dude. But the minute he takes away my ability to use an app to call a car to give me a ride at an affordable price he is done in my book.
Comment by Peter R Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 2:39 pm
Continually urging the veto of major bills without proposing any alternatives (e.g. state pensions, Chicago pensions, the budget, taxes, Uber) doesn’t make you look like a principled leader. It makes you look like an agent of chaos.
Bruce Rauner has given us a year-long preview of the his governing philosophy: disfunction solely for dysfunction’s sake.
Comment by Nope, nope, nope Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 2:57 pm
Doesn’t Rauner own a piece of Uber?
Comment by DuPage Bard Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 3:00 pm
Rahm and rauner at it again. http://www.chicagonow.com/kelly-truth-squad/2014/07/the-chicago-way-why-bruce-rauner-and-rahm-emanuel-are-really-helping-uber/
Comment by William j Kelly Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 3:04 pm
“Magic fairy dust” is ethereal by nature. It requires no details or heavy lifting.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 3:15 pm
Running on “magic dust” requires no details or heavy lifting.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 3:30 pm
There’s no way I’m paying someone to drive me around if they haven’t had to get anything more than a regular drivers license.
Comment by Cheryl44 Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 4:49 pm
Why do taxi drivers need a chauffeur license? I can see the need based back in the 1970’s and 1980’s, but today? It just doesn’t make sense now.
https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/cOnTheRoad-cAutomotive-p1.html
What, potential taxi drivers need chauffeur licenses/instructions on how to clean their vehicles?
This strikes me as just a regulation designed to generate revenue. What’s the practical purpose of requiring taxi drivers to have a chauffeur’s license?
Comment by Judgment Day Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 5:00 pm
===https://buy.garmin.com===
The worst thing about Uber is that you have to know the address. I can’t say, “Take me to Schubas.”
And it’s getting to be the same way with cab drivers. Makes me nuts. Know your city.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 5:03 pm
– Know your city.–
Last winter, I got in a cab at the Northwestern Station and asked to go to Tribune Tower. Michigan and the River. None rang a bell with the cabbie. I just got out and went down the line.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Aug 19, 14 @ 5:28 pm
Younger voters don’t understand red tape in government. It just ticks them off. They get Uber. Cheaper rides. Let’s do it.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, Aug 20, 14 @ 7:56 am
I wish Rauner would point to something other than a chauffeur’s license as a reason to oppose this bill. I simple do not see how requiring this license in any way, shape or form restrains competition if the others in the same business have to get them too. Does it restrain competition because Uber is now required to follow the same rules as everyone else and, thus, they have a competitive advantage being taken away from them? If somebody can clue me in on this I would appreciate it because I simply do not see it.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Aug 20, 14 @ 8:32 am