logo
Colorado Senate approves ride-sharing safety bill with substantial amendments

Colorado Senate approves ride-sharing safety bill with substantial amendments

Yahoo23-05-2025
Rep. Jenny Willford, a Northglenn Democrat, speaks about the Transportation Network Company Consumer Protection Act at the Colorado Capitol on Feb. 28, 2025. (Sara Wilson/Colorado Newsline)
Lawmakers heavily amended a bill on Tuesday that aims to improve safety for users of ride-sharing services like Uber, two weeks after the company threatened to pull out of the state if the legislation became law unchanged.
The Senate then gave preliminary approval to the bill after the amendments. It will be up for a final recorded vote on Wednesday, the last day of the 2025 regular lawmaking session.
'Uber and Lyft have severe safety issues and are in crisis, whether they want to admit it or not. It's why they've spent billions of marketing to convince the public they are safe,' said bill sponsor Sen. Faith Winter, a Broomfield Democrat.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
In Uber's latest U.S. safety report, it found 2,717 reports of sexual assault in 2021 and 2022, with the majority of victims being riders.
'Transportation network companies like Uber and Lyft exercise full control over their platforms and have continually implemented the lowest-cost safety measures, which are inadequate,' Winter said. 'They profit off of people, taking them at their word that they are safe.'
As introduced, House Bill 25-1291 would mandate stricter, more frequent background checks and clearer disqualifications for drivers with histories of assault, harassment, kidnapping, menacing or domestic violence. It would require companies to establish and enforce policies around preventing account sharing or driver impersonation. Drivers would be prohibited from offering food or drinks to riders.
It also would have required continuous audio and visual recording during drives.
The bill was introduced and championed by Rep. Jenny Willford, a Northglenn Democrat, who sued Lyft earlier this year over an alleged sexual assault that occurred last February. The driver during the incident was using someone else's account.
But the provisions faced staunch opposition from ride-sharing companies. Uber said last month, as the bill passed a Senate committee, that it would exit Colorado because the law would create too great a legal risk to operate, according to The Colorado Sun. That prompted a series of sweeping changes on Tuesday as the Senate considered the bill. Winter said sponsors worked with Lyft on the amendments.
The biggest amendment allows for drivers and riders to opt in to video and audio recording instead of requiring it. The state's public utilities commission would adopt rules about the recordings, including education about the safety benefits for companies. Uber has an existing safety feature that allows riders to choose to audio record a ride.
Sponsors said the amendment was hard to accept.
'A driver whose intent is to traffic, kidnap or assault someone is not going to create their own evidence,' bill sponsor Sen. Jessie Danielson, a Wheat Ridge Democrat, said. 'This is the thing we didn't want to give away, but we acknowledge there are concerns from drivers, companies and civil rights groups. We couldn't get there on this go-around, how to require the driver to film and still preserve these rights.'
Another amendment narrows the scope of when someone could bring a lawsuit against a driver or rider to instances of sexual assault, kidnapping, personal injury and death.
A driver would also need to notify the company within 48 hours of a guilty plea for an offense that would disqualify them from driving, and an amendment removed the company's liability if a driver does not report.
Lawmakers also approved an amendment that would allow the water and food ban to be enforced through random compliance checks, and would allow companies to remove driver ratings and reviews they deem bias-motivated.
Additionally, an amendment changed the timeline for a company to review a complaint against a driver to seven days from 72 hours.
It's unclear if the changes will sway Uber's position.
'Last-minute changes and a rushed process have made this legislation incredibly challenging. With new provisions added just this morning without the opportunity to review, we need time to thoroughly evaluate the bill to determine whether it is workable,' a spokesperson wrote in an email. They said Uber saw text of the Senate floor amendments on Monday night.
Winter said sponsors worked with stakeholders, including Lyft, on amendments.
If the Senate passes the bill Wednesday, it will head back to the House to concur with the amendments and then to the governor's desk for a signature.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Tejano singer Bobby Pulido is considering running for Congress
Tejano singer Bobby Pulido is considering running for Congress

Los Angeles Times

time40 minutes ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Tejano singer Bobby Pulido is considering running for Congress

Tejano singer Bobby Pulido is taking steps toward a congressional bid in South Texas to challenge Republican Rep. Monica De La Cruz. On Thursday, Pulido announced that he is launching an exploratory committee to look at 'possibly' running as a Democrat for a U.S. Congress position in 2026. The 'Desvelado' singer took to social media to clarify his reasons for his shift away from music and toward politics. 'Many of you know me from my music career, so you know I'm not a career politician, but I've always had a desire to serve,' Pulido said in a Thursday Instagram video. 'I studied political science at St. Mary's University [in San Antonio] before I decided to launch a music career. And I've chosen to leave the stage to see if I can help make the future a little bit better for our kids and our community.' The Edinburg, Texas, native took aim at De La Cruz's management of the Lone Star State's 15th Congressional District. 'Like a lot of South Texans, I'm tired of watching these folks like Monica De La Cruz go to Washington and put her party before the people,' he said. 'She's made that choice every single time.' Pulido promised he would listen to the voices of 'everyday Texans' regardless of their political affiliations or professions, before saying he is prepping to host 'ranch halls' to meet and learn from potential constituents. The 54-year-old performer will face an uphill battle if his potential campaign takes off as Texas emergency physician Dr. Ada Cuellar launched her campaign as a Democrat for the same congressional seat on July 17. Pulido said he got the idea to pursue political office from Lorena Saenz Gonzalez, the wife of Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-Texas). She told Pulido she was impressed with his political knowledge and nudged him to consider running for office. Gonzalez had previously served as the 15th District's representative but announced in October 2021 that he would run in the 34th District due to the statewide redistricting done by the Texas Legislature in fall 2021. The redistricting was criticized for leading to the dilution of the Latino vote in the region and upheld as a prime example of Republican gerrymandering. In 2022, De La Cruz became the district's first Republican representative following the restricting and was reelected in 2024. President Trump also became the first Republican presidential candidate to win the majority of votes in the district in decades during the 2020 election. Speaking on the redrawing of the 15th District, Pulido was very clear on where he stands. 'I'm not happy with the redistricting. I think it's cheating, and I don't think this is what democracy should be like,' he told The Times Friday afternoon. 'But at the end of the day, you can draw the lines, but you can't draw the people.' One way he aims to focus on the people of the district is through his emphasis on immigration policy. 'Nobody wants to fix it, everybody wants to campaign on it — we absolutely need comprehensive immigration reform,' Pulido said. 'We should not have to choose between let them all in or kick them all out. People on both sides have to have the will to actually do something about it.' He also expressed concern for the struggle of immigrants amid the ongoing Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids happening nationwide. 'They're ripping people from families, and then, you know, they're taking even American citizens and detaining them just based on how they look, and so it has to stop,' Pulido said. We have to do something about it, we can't continue to ignore it, because people are not pawns and that's what I feel is happening.' Another major issue for the musician-turned-hopeful-politician is the struggling economy of the Rio Grande Valley. 'I feel the economy and tariffs need to be addressed,' Pulido said. 'By all the metrics that we're seeing, even on a national scale, [the economy] is not well. Inflation is going higher, and I don't think these [current] policies are what the people expected; it's not giving us good results.' Pulido also expressed concern for the state of healthcare in the district, noting that people often prefer to go across the border for medical services. 'We have a lot of people that go get their healthcare in Mexico because it's more affordable. I'm not talking about a little difference; it's an astronomical difference,' he said. 'It's just it's very sad that people have to go to another country to get the healthcare that they can afford, and I feel like special interests have really dug their claws into politicians and they don't do anything to help the people.' The 'Se Murió de Amor' musician acknowledged that the Democratic Party has failed the district, which has led to Republican gains. 'I feel like the party's been a little bit negligent and not really addressing the values that Latinos have,' Pulido explained. 'I don't think the Republicans have done anything special. I don't think that's the case, but nonetheless, I think a lot of people down there feel like their vote was taken for granted.' He explained that he wants to run an 'issues-based campaign,' making sure not to run on a platform of 'vote for me because I'm famous.' 'We have to really go work on issues that affect everyday people's lives,' Pulido said. 'So that's what I intend to do, if the people are accepting of me being as a candidate, and we'll find out with these with these ranch halls.' In November, Pulido announced that he would be leaving music behind after a 2025 farewell tour to pursue a career in politics. 'To be quite honest, I'm enjoying the most success I've ever had. But like the saying goes: All good things must come to an end,' Pulido said last year during a press conference. 'Today, I'm announcing my farewell tour for next year. It's not a decision I have hastily made. I've given it a lot of thought. I think my life has reached a full circle.' He added, 'Growing up, public service always intrigued me. I was a Texas Boy Stater in high school and studied political sciences because it was a passion of mine. In 2026, I will be running for office in an attempt to fulfill my lifelong dream: to serve my people.'

Federal judge dismisses Trump administration's lawsuit against Chicago over its sanctuary city policies
Federal judge dismisses Trump administration's lawsuit against Chicago over its sanctuary city policies

NBC News

time41 minutes ago

  • NBC News

Federal judge dismisses Trump administration's lawsuit against Chicago over its sanctuary city policies

A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by the Trump administration that sought to block the enforcement of several "sanctuary policies" in Illinois that restricted the ability of local officials to aid federal immigration authorities in detainment operations. In a 64-page decision, District Court Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins, a Biden appointee, granted a motion by the state of Illinois to dismiss the case after determining the United States lacks standing to sue over the sanctuary policies. The judge noted in the ruling that Illinois' decision to enact the sanctuary laws are protected by the 10th amendment, which declares that any powers not specifically given to the federal government, or denied to the states, by the Constitution, are retained by the states. 'The Sanctuary Policies reflect Defendants' decision to not participate in enforcing civil immigration law—a decision protected by the Tenth Amendment and not preempted by the [Immigration and Nationality Act],' the judge wrote. 'Because the Tenth Amendment protects Defendants' Sanctuary Policies, those Policies cannot be found to discriminate against or regulate the federal government.' The federal judge wrote that granting the administration's request would create an "end-run around the Tenth Amendment." 'It would allow the federal government to commandeer States under the guise of intergovernmental immunity—the exact type of direct regulation of states barred by the Tenth Amendment.' Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker praised the dismissal, which he said will ensure state law enforcement is "not carrying out the Trump administration's unlawful policies or troubling tactics." "As state law allows, Illinois will assist the federal government when they follow the law and present warrants to hold violent criminals accountable. But what Illinois will not do is participate in the Trump administration's violations of the law and abuses of power," Pritzker said in a statement. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Trump Justice Department sued the state of Illinois and Cook County, the home of Chicago, in February for policies it argued infringed on the ability of federal authorities to enforce immigration laws, the first lawsuit by the administration aimed specifically at targeting "sanctuary jurisdictions," a label applied to states, cities, counties or municipalities that establish laws to prevent or limit local officials from cooperating with federal immigration authorities. In the 22-page lawsuit, filed days after Attorney General Pam Bondi was confirmed by the Senate, the Justice Department sought to block state, city and county ordinances that prohibit local law enforcement from assisting the federal government with civil immigration enforcement absent a criminal warrant. Bondi said the policies "obstruct" the federal government. 'The challenged provisions of Illinois, Chicago, and Cook County law reflect their intentional effort to obstruct the Federal Government's enforcement of federal immigration law and to impede consultation and communication between federal, state, and local law enforcement officials that is necessary for federal officials to carry out federal immigration law and keep Americans safe,' the lawsuit indicates. The administration has taken similar action to target sanctuary jurisdictions across the country, including a lawsuit this week against New York City, which was described by the Justice Department as 'the vanguard of interfering with enforcing this country's immigration laws' in a complaint filed on Thursday. The administration filed a separate lawsuit targeting New York state in February over it's 'Green Light Law,' which enables undocumented immigrants to apply for noncommercial driver's licenses and bars state officials from turning over that data to federal immigration authorities. The Justice Department in June filed a complaint against Los Angeles for immigration policies it argued interfere and discriminate against federal immigration agents by treating them differently from other law enforcement agents in the state. The suit came as Trump administration officials increasingly sparred with California Democratic leaders after immigration detainment efforts in the state led to clashes between protesters and federal authorities, and resulted in the deployment of thousands of National Guard troops. In January, Trump signed an executive order directing Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to ensure sanctuary jurisdictions 'do not receive access to federal funds' and to consider pursuing criminal or civil penalties if localities 'interfere with the enforcement of Federal law.' A federal judge in April blocked the effort to withhold federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions, finding that Trump's order violated the Constitution's separation of powers principles. That judge blocked an earlier effort by Trump in 2017.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store