Connecticut Threatens Mexicana Taxi, the State's Black Market Solution to the Cab Cartel

Earlier this month, the Connecticut Post covered a crackdown on Mexicana Taxi, a cab service in Bridgeport that does an apparently brisk business without permission from the state.

"We see them as predators who are endangering the public and taking business away from companies that are following the rules," said Dennis King, manager of regulatory compliance for the state Department of Transportation [DOT].... Police here have arrested drivers for Mexicana Taxi, a new company that finds clients by leaving business cards in bodegas and churches, and caters mostly to a Hispanic clientele.

To follow the rules, Mexicana would need to apply for a “certificate of public convenience and necessity” from the DOT, which kicks off a regulatory process that can take four (4) years and generally results in no certificate. This is because the law allows incumbent cab companies to formally oppose applications from potential competitors and because DOT staff believe competition is inherently bad.

From a 2010 ruling:

Flooding the market with too many vehicles leads to taxicab drivers not making enough money and can result in fights between the drivers, customer stealing, bad maintenance on the vehicles and a host of other ills that occurs when the market place is flooded with a service and people can’t make a decent wage.

It’s not only startups that have a difficult time getting permission to do business. Last year, the department rejected an application from Metro Taxi, an established company that wanted to expand its fleet to include more handicapped-accessible cabs—despite testimony from residents saying there is a need for more such cabs.

Other recent rulings shed light on whether Mexicana might realistically expect to get a fair hearing.

In 2009, USA Taxi applied for authorization to operate 20 cabs in Norwalk. All three of Norwalk’s existing companies opposed the application, which the DOT denied this October, three years and nine months after it was filed:

The applicant argued that the taxicabs should be granted based on the increase in population in Norwalk. That is not how our taxicab regulatory system works…. Merely showing an increase in population is not enough to show that additional taxicabs are needed as there is no direct correlation established between increased population and increased need for taxicabs in Norwalk.

Independent Taxicab applied in September 2008 for authorization to operate 18 cabs in Stamford—in addition to the eight it already runs. The DOT denied the application, also opposed by a competitor, in September 2012:

The applicant’s real problem is not the lack of vehicles, but rather the administration of how the vehicles it already has are being used…. Clearly, [additional] calls can be absorbed by the applicant if it was operating an efficient service.

For more Reason coverage of state-enforced taxi cartels, click here, here, and here.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • nicole||

    And here I thought the moving company story from last week sucked. Fuck you, CT DOT.

    Also, wtf is "customer stealing"?

  • Tonio||

    It means that customers who get low taxi fares will be driven to a life of crime. Don't you know anything? /sarc

  • ||

    Also, wtf is "customer stealing"?

    It's when you charge a lower fare than the other guy, and thus cause people to want to ride with him instead.

    Sort of like the way Apple steals customers from Microsoft, ultimately forcing computer programmers to work for slave wages and skimp on the quality of their operating systems.

  • Robert||

    I imagine customer stealing to be pulling up closer than the other cab that's already stopped for the fare. They'll say that leads to dangerous traffic conditions.

  • ||

    Flooding the market with too many vehicles leads to taxicab drivers not making enough money and can result in fights between the drivers, customer stealing, bad maintenance on the vehicles and a host of other ills that occurs when the market place is flooded with a service and people can’t make a decent wage.

    Too much competition means cab drivers can't charge as much and have to fight over customers. Horrifying.

  • nicole||

    Merely showing an increase in population is not enough to show that additional taxicabs are needed as there is no direct correlation established between increased population and increased need for taxicabs in Norwalk.

    I'm sure increasing population has never been used as justification for increased state and municipal budgets.

  • Doctor Whom||

    "We see them as predators who are endangering the public

    What could possibly be more predatory than giving willing customers what they want?

    and taking business away from companies that are following the rules,"

    It's easy to follow the rules when the rules are written to benefit you.

  • Libertymike||

    Has anybody considered the possibility that Mr. Lanza's alleged actions may have been motivated by Connecticut's de jure cab cartelization?

  • ||

    Maybe those kids were child prostitutes.

  • JeremyR||

    Wasn't that the plot of DC Cab?

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement