Calif. Lawmaker Votes for More Regs for Ride-Sharing, Then Gets Busted for DUI


If you follow the kind of laws California passes you'd think this was from before the votes.
From CalNewsroom

Courtesy of California political reporter John Hrabe, California Assemblyman Ben Hueso, a Democrat representing the San Diego area, was arrested in the wee hours of the morning for allegedly driving under the influence. This came just hours after voting for legislation that would force more regulation on ride-sharing services like Lyft and Uber. Hrabe notes:

Assembly Bill 612 by Assemblyman Adrin Nazarian, D-Van Nuys, would require ride-sharing companies to abide by extensive new regulations. Earlier this month, in an interview with the San Jose Mercury News, Sidecar CEO Sunil Paul said that the bill could mean the end of the industry that's helped minimize drunk driving.

Paul told the Mercury News that the bill was "a burdensome approach that is backed by the taxicab lobby, really, to try and shut us down. If it passes, it is a disaster — it would literally spell the end of the ride-share industry."

The Sacramento Bee reports that Hueso was driving the wrong way down a one-way road at 2:30 in the morning.

In July, The Washington Post analyzed data that showed the number of DUI arrests dropping after ride-sharing services were introduced to cities like Philadelphia and San Francisco. It may be too early to say there's a direct relationship, but in the event Hueso actually was driving under the influence, maybe his time in the pokey might cause him to rethink whether making it harder for people to find alternatives to driving themselves was a good idea.

Update: Or maybe not. Turns out Hueso's brothers own a taxi company.

NEXT: Sex Offender Restrictions Turn Residents of New York Into Residents of Limbo

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.

  1. Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.

    1. The irony – it BURNS

    2. Is this an Airplane 2 reference?

      1. The Irony Oxide burns especially well when mixed with the right proportion of powdered aluminum.

        /Mythbusters reference

  2. California Assemblyman Ben Hueso, a Democrat representing the San Diego area

    Apparently, this guy didn’t get the memo. You have to actually wait until you are elected to US Congress before you can drive drunk down a one way street. Derp!

    1. At least he wasn’t jackin’ it in San Diego.

      1. Speaking of jackin’ it, we do realize this is the guy who accused Carl DeMaio of masturbating in the men’s room in San Diego City Hall? And then went into hiding when Demaio denounced it loud and proud and the press went back to Hueso and said “Hmmmmm?”

  3. Well this is interesting. I’ve met Hueso several times, and he seems like a nice enough guy. Redder than a baboon’s ass like most California Democrats, so I don’t discuss politics with him, but he’s not insufferable.

    Maybe this experience will make him less likely to increase the size of Leviathan? Whom am I kidding? If anything, he’s now going to be required to ratchet up the law and order side of his schtick in order to show that he’s a reformed man.

    1. Well, like I said above, he didn’t get the memo. But now that he’s been caught with his pants down, we all know the routine. Apologize, apologize, apologize, ad nauseam, maybe even cry on the teevee. Go off to ‘treatment’ country club and get reformed, re-emerge as ‘new man’, surely holier than holy this time, learn how not to get caught next time and continue to be even bigger hypocrite and asshole.

      1. Surely there must be a way to blame this on Bush, the Tea Party, or lack of government spending.

        1. It’s always a lack of government spending no matter what or who else may be at fault.

        2. Hueso: see what happens when California fails to invest properly in light rail?

    2. I’ve met Hueso several times, and he seems like a nice enough guy.

      Many commie rat bastards can appear quite amiable while they’re plotting to kill you and loot your home.


    3. Excuse me. NICE? See my comment above. He might be polite and mannerly, but he’s a lying, devious, gutless bastard.

      1. Dude, I met him at social functions. I didn’t take his deposition. I’m sure if I went through his voting record or examine his political life in detail I’d find all sorts of objectionable shit. But that pretty much goes for every politician.

  4. “America Drinks and Goes Home” Absolutely Free?Mothers of Invention


  5. I don’t know if this has been covered but just in case:


    PORTLAND Ore. (Reuters) – The state of Oregon sued Oracle America Inc. and six of its top executives Friday, accusing the software giant of fraud for failing to deliver a working website for the Affordable Care Act program.

    1. Wait, …. what? The ACA requires a working website? I thought a non-working website WAS the requirement?

      1. Who knew that vague abstractions and good intentions wasn’t enough?

        1. It’s only enough if it costs the tax payers at least 600 million.

    2. PORTLAND Ore. (Reuters) – The state of Oregon sued Oracle America Inc. and six of its top executives Friday, accusing the software giant of fraud for failing to deliver a working website for the Affordable Care Act program.

      Can I sue the state of Washington and six of its top executives for failing to deliver a working government?

      1. I’m gonna go with…no.

        But government means never having to accept blame for anything so they’ll probably win the suit against Oracle.

      2. Catch-22.

        If you can sue the government, then government is working, therefore you have nothing to sue over.

      3. Anyone hiring Oracle for any kind of software development project should be canned for incompetence. Larry’s kids have a disgraceful record of expensive failures going back for at least a decade. Google for “Oracle California DMV debacle”


        1. Hooo… I did, and looky looky looky what I found:

          Although the state hadn’t paid any money, by early 2002, Koch Financial, which financed the deal, had already paid $52.7 million to Logicon, which passed $35.5 million on to Oracle.

          Yeah… uhuh. The Kochs, ruining California again.

    3. I am sure the State of Washington can drag out the design specs they gave Oracle as well as any change orders. Oh wait. They can’t. There were none.

      1. Should they have to? What’s the point of paying Oracle hundreds of millions of dollars if you have to design and manage everything yourself anyways.

        1. You have to give design specs. Have to. There has to be a list of “must be able to do this, can’t do this, etc, etc”. If they provided one that didn’t cover what they actually needed, they, not Oracle, fucked up.

          I once worked on a NYCDOT software contract. They were so disorganized it was scary. And they couldn’t draw up a design spec to save their life, so I talked and talked to them to try and draw one up. They still fucked it up royally because they didn’t have a grasp on what they wanted because they were unbelievably incompetent.

          1. Drawing up the design specs is the systems integrator’s job. Whether that was the state’s responsibility or not is the crux of the lawsuit. Oracle claims that Oregon Health Services was the integrator, Oregon claims Oracle Consulting Services was.

          2. That’s what happens when you make a career out of being the high school junior class president.

    4. Fuck Larry Ellison. With any luck, the state of Oregon will also find culpability on the part of Facebook and Google.

  6. maybe his time in the pokey might cause him to rethink whether making it harder for people to find alternatives to driving themselves was a good idea.

    Rethink? That implies there was any thought behind it in the first place, which we all there wasn’t.

  7. Sounds like some pretty serious business. WOw.


  8. Does anyone else get two commenting boxes when you click “reply to this”?

    1. nope

    2. nope

      1. Weird. I do on my computer at home, but not at work as far as I can tell.

        I just noticed that the second box doesn’t have reasonable formatting features. Maybe it is somthing to do with reasonable.

        1. doesn’t have reasonable formatting features

          I never noticed those before. Ive been doing it by hand. Probably will continue.

        2. Not due to reasonable, I think: I don’t have reasonable on my computer and I’ve gotten the second box at times.

          1. I got it earlier today, along with bullet points next to each comment. Both gone now. Web guy must be playing with us.

    3. Not right now, although it’s happened in the past.

  9. California is the DUI capital of the US (1 of every 5 DUIs occur in California). I know firsthand since I have one, and can attest that my fellow lawbreakers swear by affordable taxi services such as Uber. If the so-called lawmakers really want to make the state safer then they would enthusiastically support any solution that gets drunk drivers (like me!) off the road. I’ll be curious to see if this ‘lawmaker’ gets punished as harshly as an insignificant nobody as I did. I suspect not, but I’ll be watching…

    1. Whoa, 20% of all USA DUIs are in Cali? That seems a bit high to me. I know it’s Stooopid derp out there, but I know every state in the Union has a super DUI hard on spot where they like to enforce.

      1. It’s true. Each year there are 1 million DUIs in the US, and 200,000 of those are in California. And the DUI capital of California is Orange County (where I live, unfortunately). But DUIs have been dropping, so there’s talk of lowering the BAC level from .08 to .05. That’ll make a lot more money for the state (and turn more people into criminals), but will it make anyone safer? I suspect not.

        1. Yes, and Cali also has some obscene percentage of jaywalkers — which merely tells you that we CATCH the lawbreakers.

          1. I should add: it’s a cultural thing. Nothing whatsoever to do with conscientious government.

        2. “there’s talk of lowering the BAC level from .08 to .05.”

          Yikes – I didn’t know about that. That’s like going from “you had a beer” to “you were standing next to someone who had a beer.”

          I think you’re right that the safety impact is going to be minimal.

          1. .05 is ridiculous.

            I’m a liberal and I’ll admit that making the BAC threshold at .05 is nothing more than a municipal Fund Raiser.

            1. .05 is ridiculous.

              Agreed and that’s the limit here in the statist shithole of Ontario.

            2. I’m a liberal and I’ll admit that making the BAC threshold at .05 is nothing more than a municipal Fund Raiser.

              Virtually everything the government does is nothing more than a municipal fund raiser. They need the money for the troops peace officers to control non-violent citizens.

  10. I can only guess that the google-car with NO DRIVER will solve this DUI matter in the USA pretty quick. It will put millions out of work as well.

    1. It will put millions out of work as well.

      Good. They can find something more productive to do, and the rest of us get safer, cheaper rides. Win/win.

      1. It’s a win-win if you don’t drive for a living. rather typical callous response from a Libertarian. Don’t be too shocked to find that the worker-bees don’t wanna vote for guys.

        1. Alice Bowie, the reincarnation of Ned Lud?

        2. Go away, go back to the time when other jobs existed that don’t now, and then you can block the new industries which would have employed the workers in their new more interesting jobs.

          Or come with the rest of the world into the future, where people with menial jobs like driving have graduated to more challenging interesting jobs.

          Creative destruction, it’s called. Without it, we’d all still be hunter gatherers.

          What a maroon.

        3. Hot-Shot delivery drivers will be replaced with civilian drone pilots for small to medium sized deliveries.

          Semi-load type deliveries probably won’t be affected. I don’t see anybody programming a semi to back up into a loading dock flawlessly anytime soon.

          The point is, delivery jobs will still be there. They’ll just change.

    2. Nah, CA will mandate ignition interlocks anyway.

      This shit is not about ‘drinking and driving’, its about *drinking in public* (and, really, about drinking at all).

      Plus, you need to explain how an efficiency improvement that reduces the demand for labor is a bad thing – we get the same amount of stuff *and* these people can go out and make *more* stuff? Sign me up.

      1. The liberal obsession with “caste” is really annoying. They act like people are born into their current jobs – incapable of doing anything else.

        1. Nobody is born into their jobs.

          However, people do invest a big part of their lives in a job and creative destruction has a tendency of putting the unskilled or the specially skilled in a hardship in which you guys are sure to brush off…unless it was your job.

          1. As an atheist with strong Judeo-Christian values and tons of empathy and love for working people, I don’t know what to do about those people. I suspect the buggy-whip manufacturers met sad ends. Unions had not yet dawned. The railroad firemen who went to “work” every day decades after coal was no longer used to power trains, I despise. Similar for the laid-off auto workers who were offered free four-year college degrees by GM and refused, every last one of them, to a (wo)man.

            1. I don’t know what to do about those people.

              Warren Buffet about four months ago said the same thing. He mentioned that their are think-tanks out there going over it but what to do is up in the air.

              I think the concept of the Guaranteed Salary (Citizens Wage or Negative Income Tax) is something to consider i guess. Even though, I, a big liberal, don’t think it is a good idea.

              1. I read a short story several years ago called “The Purple Wage”. It was about a society that had a Guaranteed Salary, and how it eventually just ruined most of society.

                Fathers would routinely abandon their homes, because work was almost impossible to come by and they had no role to play in providing for or defending their families.

                Mothers would fuck their children because the fathers were gone (not kidding) and then grow angry and pissy when their kids eventually left the home.

                Talent was rare and skilled artists were prized. People could still live better lives if they could provide a service people were willing to spend money on, but it was so highly regulated that there was nearly nothing you could do.

                Though privacy was still valued. Which is odd. Worth a read, if you can dig it up.

          2. unless it was your job

            I’m still not getting what the big deal is. I trained myself for my current position, in my own time. If it comes down to it, I will do it again. If someone else doesn’t have the initiative to do what it takes to be successful, why should I give a shit?

            1. Because they will come back to us, the tax payers anyway in various ways.

              I’m also not referring to you. You sound like you have it together.

              One should consider giving a shit about others. We all live better if we all live better.

          3. I was in an industry which experienced a lot of structural changes (most of which were bad for employees) with the recession due to change in demand. But, unlike my colleagues, I didn’t just bitch and moan about it. I adapted and moved to a more in-demand line of work.

            I don’t expect anyone to feel sorry for me and I sure as hell don’t feel sorry for my colleagues because there is only one attitude you can have to make it in this world: Of what use am I? If you don’t recognize your value in terms of true and exceptional usefulness, you’re no better than an entitled child and you will be compensated as such.

      2. If you are the owner of the transportation chain and company that no longer needs to hire workers and offer benefits, I can’t think of a better situation for the owner.

        If you are the truck driver in your 40s/50s, they may not be too happy about that.

        1. they may not be too happy about that


        2. So we should legislate away any innovation which might destroy a job somewhere else?

          1. Of course not. Besides, that is pretty much impossible. Look at the UK’s Locomotive Acts.

            What I’m saying is that we’ll need to be prepared to deal with people unemployed in the Driving Industry.

            1. Who is “we” and how do “we” prepare? I would hazard a guess that you mean Top Men in government must come up with a central plan to deal with it. The real world doesn’t work like that. You yourself cite the Locomotive Acts as a failure. Well, any “solution” by government will have the same problem.

    3. You imagine you are deploying the thing called Humor.

      Tonight on Channel 51, one of Ben Hueso’s constituents made that very argument. We need automatic cars to prevent drunk driving! Then all these . . . tickets, and accidents and whatnot wouldn’t strike well-meaning Democrat politicians!

      1. Creative Destruction is a fact of life.

        Driving (for a living) will go away as many other professions did.

        What we are facing though is the liquidity of opportunity is drying up for specialized-skills (that get kabashed by creative destruction) and the unskilled (especially over 38years of age).

        These people will come to us, the tax payer at some point.

        1. Mind you, I have no objection to robocars per se. It’s a tragedy that the handshakes between their Silly Valley producers and Big Government will cost us trillions of dollars to put them on the road.

        2. This is symptomatic of zero sum thinking, “There is only a limited amount of stuff. Employment opportunities are stuff. Take away one form of employment and the total amount of employment is decreasesed job for job. People will wander the streets, to remain ever jobless.”

  11. Are all these assholes getting kickbacks from cab companies, or are they raeally that fucking retarded?

    1. Cab companies pay shitloads of bribe money. That’s why taxi medallions have traded hands for over a million bucks.


      1. And why the L.A. subway stops precisely one mile short of LAX.

        1. It’s even further than any NY Airport.

          1. That’s actually more tolerable than getting into a cab for ONE FUCKING MILE.

            A longer ride would justify the fee to hail the cab.

            The one-mile ride doesn’t even pay off.

  12. Yeah OK wow that makes a lot of sense dude.


  13. Small update. Turns out Hueso’s brothers own a cab company. So that’s interesting.

    1. Exactly. Why that isn’t trotted out as Exhibit A by the opposition is completely beyond me. Oh wait, it’s coastal socal, there is no political opposition.
      It amazes me that for many fields having a family or financial stake in an issue means you excuse yourself from it, but for freaking LAWMAKERS it’s completely normal to do the complete opposite. Goddamn ethics 101…

  14. The Sacramento Bee reports that Hueso was driving the wrong way down a one-way road at 2:30 in the morning.

    “I was only going one way!”

    1. He was driving left.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.