Sharing Economy

Democrats Are Uber Hypocrites

Study: Dem candidates spend more on ride-sharing than their GOP counterparts

|

It's in vogue for Democrats to decry the sharing economy as exploitative and unsafe. Cities across the country, nearly all of them headed by liberals, have cracked down on companies like Lyft and Airbnb that allow regular people to earn money by providing rides across town or renting out their spare bedrooms. Austin, Texas, recently regulated ride-sharing out of existence completely, while New York Mayor Bill de Blasio last year tried to require the industry to cease growing. Democratic presidential wannabe Bernie Sanders brags about the "serious problems" he has with Uber. And if you were a Reason subscriber you'd already have access to the July issue, which features a piece on Hillary Clinton's disdain for the popular ride-hailing app.

Yet according to a new study from Freedom Partners (full disclosure: I worked there in 2014), Democratic congressional candidates spend more money on ride-sharing services than Republicans do.

Chart from Freedom Partners
Freedom Partners

Hypocritical much?

Researchers Michael Decker and Thomas Kise looked at Federal Election Commission congressional campaign filings and found that five of the top six spenders on ride-sharing so far this election cycle are Democrats. Likewise, that party represents five of the top seven spenders on websites like Airbnb and HomeAway that let travelers rent out a couch, room, apartment, or house rather than shelling out for a hotel, the report says.

"When you look at politicians and policy makers like Secretary Clinton and like Bernie Sanders and others, it's kind of unfortunate that [despite] being some of the harshest critics, their campaigns continue to use the services," Kise says. "That's kind of interesting."

Overall use of these apps and websites is through the roof: According to the paper, ride-sharing accounts for "more than 80 percent of total rides appearing in campaign committee filings" for the 2016 cycle. In fact, campaigns have gotten more rides through companies like Uber and Lyft so far this election (over 5,000) than there were total combined taxi and ride-share trips four years ago (less than 3,000). This suggests that the new economy isn't just replacing the old one—it's actually growing the market.

Chart from Freedom Partners
Freedom Partners

"As we look at these numbers and we see a growth in usage and overall market share [it seems clear] that these congressional campaign committees have found value in these services," Kise says. "If they're finding value, and the American people are finding value, they should not get in the way and stifle that" by pushing for more and stricter sharing-economy regulations.

A guy can hope.

NEXT: 'She Looked 18'

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. It’s totally consistent with their idea of government.

    They need to government to make them stop exploiting people.

    Just like they need the government to make than pay more in taxes.

    Just like hey need the government to make them stop raping people.

    It’s government, all the way down.

    1. It’s also consistent with the TOP MEN’s view that laws and prohibitions are just for the hoi polloi.

  2. Politicians passing laws for me and not for thee would hardly be anything new. Congress writes itself exclusions from most anything that might be inconvenient.

  3. Yet according to a new study from Freedom Partners (full disclosure: I worked there in 2014), Democratic congressional candidates spend more money on ride-sharing services than Republicans do.

    I’m surprised this required a study.

    Uber and Lyft flourish(ed) in the bluest of the blue cities with a clientele that leans pretty young.

    1. My immediate thought as well… this is a demographics issue. Uber and Lyft operate in cities and cities vote Democrat.

  4. That which is not specifically permitted is prohibited.

  5. five of the top six spenders on ride-sharing so far this election cycle are Democrats.

    They’re just doing research on the exploitative and unsafe sharing economy in preparation for future crackdowns.

  6. Too lazy to link, but NYT published an awesome end zone dance from some hipster douchebag Austinite creaming himself about how “We the Enlightened People of Austin” showed Uber who’s boss.

    “We’re gonna get more DUIs. That’ll show those assholes.”

    1. and he authored “…How Texas will Transform the nation”

      but he forgot “back to 1955”

    2. “I want to pay higher fares and to have no service when it rains!” These people have been so thoroughly brainwashed by the Left it’s unbelievable.

  7. Democratic presidential wannabe Bernie Sanders brags about the “serious problems” he has with Uber.

    Let me guess- it’s not a “free” service provided by the government.

    What did I win?

    1. What did I win?

      You can choose from 3 fabulous prizes:

      President Clinton
      President Bernie
      President The Donald.

  8. Eh, this is ridiculous. You’ve shown that some democrats hate Uber while other democrats use it. So what? This is a complete non-story unless you can prove there’s an overlap.

    Identify specific legislators who *both* hate Uber *and* use the service. Then you’ll have a story.

    1. Those democrats don’t hate Uber. They do however love the large bribes, excuse me, “campaign contributions” they get from the local taxi cartel.

    2. You mean kinda like this?
      “When you look at politicians and policy makers like Secretary Clinton and like Bernie Sanders and others, it’s kind of unfortunate that [despite] being some of the harshest critics, their campaigns continue to use the services,” Krise says. “That’s kind of interesting.”
      RTFA.

    3. The political campaigns cited do attack Uber and push for regulation.

    4. Taking your post as serious, here’s one:

      http://watchdog.org/245688/ber…..hypocrite/

      Here’s another:

      http://dailycaller.com/2015/07…..-using-it/

      30 seconds on that intertoobz thingy.

    5. Who is this sockpuppet?

      You don’t think them trying to legislate it out of existence or trying to maintain a racket while they use a service is hypocritical?

      Non-story my ass.

      1. I do think there’s something to that notion. Since ridesharing is massively more popular among the youngins, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if there isn’t much overlap between the millenial campaign handlers and the geezer all-for-the-union labor activists. We’ve already seen this chasm between the Bernie and Hillary movements.

        Let’s leave collectivization of guilt to the SJW mental midgets, and not adopt their tactics, lending them legitimacy, mmkay?

        1. Not sure what you took issue with regarding my comment though.

          If that be the case, so what? They should be aware of it and not demonize or play politics with a legit business.

        2. “Let’s leave collectivization of guilt to the SJW mental midgets, and not adopt their tactics, lending them legitimacy, mmkay?”

          Why don’t you try that again after thinking this time?
          Plenty of staffers working for those trying to outlaw these services are using them; ‘collectivization’ my ass.

  9. As normal for the ‘okay for me but not for thee’ crowd.

  10. Oh please. You’re talking as if the personal is political or something.

  11. Democratic congressional candidates spend more money on ride-sharing services than Republicans do.

    How do you think they identified the next sheep to fleece?

  12. “That’s kind of interesting.”

    More like “that’s kind of full of shit.”

  13. Per the linked report, here’s something Mark Warner said about Uber, which is apparently supposed to be anti-Uber:

    “We have a responsibility to provide clarity and predictability instead of allowing inconsistency and confusion as these issues are litigated on a case-by-case and state-by-state basis.”

    But if you replace “state-by-state” with “city-by-city,” this is exactly the strategy Uber adopted in California, where they got a single set of statewide regulations through the Public Utilities Commission rather than doing things on a case-by-case and city-by-city basis. Wouldn’t one set of nationwide regulations be exactly what Uber wants, provided the regulations are favorable to Uber?

    1. Maybe the are staunch federalists.

      1. s/the/they/

        Uber thinks the state is the level of sovereignty, nit the feds, not the cities, not the individual.

  14. Democrats Are Uber Hypocrites

    There you go, the title is fixed.

    1. Democrats are ?ber-hypocrites.

      1. It’s not as funny when you have to explain it.

    2. See, I was gonna go with

      Democrats Are Uber Hypocrites

      Of course they are, but what’s their take on ride-sharing?

  15. I am making $95/hour working from home. I never thought that it was legitimate but my best friend is earning $12 thousand a month by working online, that was really surprising for me, she recommended me to try it. just try it out on the following website…

    —————————————>>>> http://www.earnmore9.com

  16. This is vaguely topical due to my reply being something about me blaming Uber. But I need to get this out there so I’m not alone in being exposed to this level of …whatever the hell it is.

    Found this beauty morning on my Facebook feed from an acquaintance (who is also a Democrat political writer):

    “Every Libertarian should be forced to live through a rainy season in Houston. No zoning, very little government interference in development, and what sort of results does that get? The fourth largest city in the most powerful nation on earth turns into a punch bowl every time it rains.
    We have to do better than this because we are better than this.”

    Never mind that it’s a sea level city that just got two feet of rain in the last six weeks. There ought to be a freaking law!

    1. god has been ignoring federal regulators for *years*. damn libertarians!

    2. “Never mind that it’s a sea level city that just got two feet of rain in the last six weeks. There ought to be a freaking law!”

      I understand the French are considering outlawing flooding; you could pass that on to your acquaintance.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.