If you don't live in the San Francisco Bay Area or a handful of big cities, you probably haven't noticed the revolution in the taxi and livery cab businesses. In the Bay Area, local startups Uber, SideCar, and Lyft have made it a breeze to snag a ride in a taxi, a limo, or even your neighbor's aging Honda Civic. All it takes is firing up one of their apps on your smartphone. These companies' GPS-based dispatch systems allow almost anybody with an Android or iPhone and a clean driving record to make money as a quasi-legal gypsy cab driver. This ride revolution has made getting around town cheaper and easier, but has sapped the livelihoods of traditional cabbies and raised safety and security concerns.
Uber now operates in dozens of cities, and SideCar isn't far behind, having expanded its gypsy cab (or "ride-sharing") service last month to Chicago, Boston, Brooklyn, and Washington, DC. Lyft's trademark pink mustache, meanwhile, has become a pop culture meme. But the success of these alt-taxi firms may ultimately depend on whether California regulators put the kibosh on them—since other cities and states could well follow California's lead.
Today, the California Public Utilities Commission will hold a workshop aimed at drafting new regulations for the companies, which it deems "new online-enabled transportation services." Up for discussion will be whether these services must play by the same rules as traditional transportation companies—which include hefty insurance requirements, handicap accessibility, and set safety standards.
Many taxi and limo drivers, and even some of Uber's own "partners" (drivers) think they should. I caught up with both sides at Uber HQ, where an ad hoc group of UberBlack drivers calling themselves Limounion was holding a protest, claiming Uber was taking a cut of their tips—a skirmish I wrote about here.
Ted Nugent and US Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas) Office of Rep. Stockman
Various parts of America have at different times served as refuges for the persecuted. The North was a popular destination for freed and escaped slaves. San Francisco attracted gays. The Emerald Triangle and Appalachia became havens for pot growers and bootleggers.
Now Texas wants in on the action.
On Friday, US Rep. Steve Stockman, a Republican from Friendswood, sent the following message to "all persecuted gun owners and unwanted manufacturers":
Come to Texas!!! The state which believes the whole Bill of Rights should be followed, not just the "politically correct" parts. Your rights will not be infringed upon here, unlike many current local regimes [sic].
Texans who may want abortions or same-sex marriages will doubtless celebrate their state's newfound support for "the whole Bill of Rights." But will gun companies relocate because of it? Their executives want us to think so. After Colorado signed a gun control package last month, two makers of firearms accessories said they'd leave. The weapons makers Beretta, Colt, Mossberg, and Stag Arms have threatened to yank factories from Connecticut and Maryland if those states make good on new gun restrictions.
Of course, any Texan who actually knows guns will tell you that the complainers are all hat and no cattle. State laws requiring background checks or banning certain types of weapons won't crimp manufacturers, who sell their guns nationwide and globally. Just take the example of Beretta and Mossberg: These companies are headquartered in or source their guns from, respectively, Italy and Turkey, where highly restrictive firearms laws haven't slowed down some $150 million in yearly exports of rifles, pistols, and shotguns to the United States.
Stockman's open letter is really more about shooting off his mouth than defending the rights of shooters. It's about burnishing his reputation as "the new Michele Bachmann," a comparison that, in all fairness, is kind of like calling Madonna the new Lady Gaga.
During a scandalous and painfully brief congressional stint in the mid-1990s, Stockman earned infamy for defending the militia movement in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing and suggesting that Bill Clinton raided Waco's Branch Davidian compound in order to build support for gun control. Now back in Congress after wandering the political desert for 15 years, Stockman, a bespectacled born-again Christian, has threatened to launch impeachment proceedings against President Obama if he enacts gun control measures. In February, Stockman brought has-been rocker/offhand racist/wannabe presidential assassin Ted Nugent to the State of the Union address. (We caught Nugent's performance—or was it performance art—in San Francisco not too long ago.)
None of which is to say that Stockman won't succeed in getting some gun nuts to move across the Red River. Heck, he might even make the rest of us safer.
For the first time in more than four decades of surveying national attitudes towards marijuana, the Pew Research Center announced today that a majority of Americans believe that pot should be legal. Pew's latest phone survey, conducted over the course of five days last month, found that 52 percent of Americans support pot legalization and 45 percent oppose it.
The most surprising support for tokers' rights came from some of the most socially conservative parts of America. Among residents of the 26 states that have not decriminalized pot or enacted medical marijuana legislation, a whopping 50 percent backed legalization in the poll, compared to only 47 percent who opposed it.
Shifting views on cannabis have a lot to do with changing demographics. The gigantic Millennial generation supports legalization at a rate of nearly 3 to 1. Yet Boomers' views have also shifted, or, you might say, boomeranged: In 1978, 47 percent of Boomers favored legalization, but their support plummeted to 17 percent by 1990 before slowly inching back up, finally hitting the 50 percent mark just this year.
As memories of Reefer Madness and the '60s culture wars continue to fade, more Americans are divorcing pot smoking from notions of morality:
Instead of a crusade against the devil, Americans increasingly view the war on weed in economic terms—and they don't like what they see. A full 72 percent of poll respondents agreed that "government efforts to enforce marijuana laws cost more then they are worth."
In 1791, America's founding fathers enacted a constitutional right to bear arms, in part to help citizen militias protect the homeland against foreign invaders. Some 300 years later, foreigners have become some of the Second Amendment's biggest beneficiaries and shrillest advocates. In 2009, the United States imported 3.9 million guns, some 16 times more than we exported. Those imports accounted for 43 percent of new guns available to Americans that year. The vast majority—think Beretta, Glock, Taurus, and other name brands—came from countries with far stricter gun control laws than we have in the United States.
Every time another mass shooter unleashes a torrent of bullets in a school or theater, the world puzzles over America's permissive approach to gun ownership. A story following up on the Sandy Hook massacre in Austria's largest daily, Krone, noted the apparent link between "lax weapons laws" in the United States and our "high rate of gun killings, compared to other western nations." But the newspaper didn't mention how Austrian gun makers profit from and help perpetuate those lax weapons laws. In 2009, a whopping 67 percent of Austria's gun exports went to the United States. Here's the breakdown for our top 10 foreign suppliers.
Defense cuts have forced commanders at Southern California's Naval Base Ventura County to idle planes and cancel troop deployments, but you'd never know it from looking at nearby defense contractor Northrup Grumman: Its stock price has risen 9 percent in less than a month, buoyed by brisk sales of drones such as the Fire Scout unmanned helicopter, which will be deployed at the base this summer.
Indeed, lean times in the public sector appear to be helping drone manufacturers, as they pitch unmanned aircraft as cheaper replacements for a wide range of activities involving human labor and/or dangerous conditions. "We can capitalize on this budget-constrained environment to keep this development going," explained Janis Pamiljans, Northrup Grumman's head of unmanned air systems.
Pamiljans was addressing a who's who of manufacturers, hobbyists, and public officials who showed up at the naval base last week during a conference on civilian applications of drones (the industry calls them "unmanned aerial vehicles"), which could constitute a $90 billion market within a decade—or so says the industry's trade group, the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI). "We are not darkening the skies yet," said Richard Christiansen, the vice-president of the NASA contractor Sierra Lobo Inc., "but we are poised."