Will the Kalamazoo, Michigan shooting press Uber to change their complaint process?; the new Metro CEO talks with AirTalk for the first time; and subsidizing internet bills to help low income students succeed academically.
In wake of Kalamazoo shooting, how and whether Uber should have local customer support
Before Jason Dalton allegedly carried out a shooting spree that left six dead on Saturday evening in Kalamazoo, Michigan, local police may have gotten at least two separate calls from people complaining about Uber driver who was all over the road.
It’s unclear at this point how law enforcement prioritized those calls or why they chose not to respond, but the end result was a seemingly random mass shooting carried out by a man who didn’t seem to have much of a reason for doing it.
The shooting also raises questions about Uber’s responsibility to provide both drivers and passengers with a safe ride. Uber is a nationwide company, but is based in San Francisco and does not have the regional support structure other major companies might have. While there are Uber Partner Support Centers in cities like Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco, it’s not clear whether those centers provide support for passengers as well as drivers.
While the customer who jumped out of Dalton’s car says he did file a complaint with Uber, the company said in a conference call yesterday that it doesn’t deactivate drivers due to complaints of erratic driving because it would be unfair not to hear the driver’s side of the story. If a passenger alleges violence, Uber will suspend the driver within minutes.
But even if Uber had deactivated Dalton, it’s unlikely that would have stopped him from continuing his rampage. So, should Uber install a panic button for U.S. passengers? Uber says the U.S.’s panic button is 911, and that they can’t and don’t want to try and replace that.
Do you think Uber should be responsible for providing more local support to ensure passenger safety or is that the job of law enforcement? What would that model look like, if it’s even possible? If it’s not, what could Uber do to be more proactive about addressing complaints involving erratic driving?
Guests:
Carolyn Said, business reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle covering the sharing economy
Siona Listokin, associate professor at George Mason University School of Public Policy
Bill Rouse, General Manager of Los Angeles Yellow Cab and President of the Taxicab, Limousine and Paratransit Association
New Metro CEO talks transportation with Patt Morrison
Los Angeles County Metro CEO Phillip A. Washington delivered his first annual State of the Agency last month -- just days after a Board Report indicated a decline in ridership.
The report revealed that the agency has experienced a decline in ridership since 2014 and attributed the decline to low gas prices and ridesharing companies like Uber and Lyft.
New technological add-ons, including cell service and Wi-Fi, are being added to the Union Station and the 7th/Metro underground tunnels next month, but will it be enough to attract new riders? How likely is the Paid Parking Pilot Program proposal to pass and how will the profits benefit LA Metro?
Guest:
Phillip A. Washington, CEO, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
Closing the homework digital divide: The FCC's vote on whether to expand its Lifeline phone subsidy program
Acknowledging the growing digital divide in education, next month members of FCC are expected to vote on re-allocating some of its two billion dollars per year funds for the Lifeline phone subsidy program to also include internet services for low-income homes.
About five million families in the U.S. are estimated to lack access to internet in their homes. FCC Commissioner, Jessica Rosenworcel, cites research that about seven in 10 teachers assign students homework that requires access to the web.
The Lifeline program was created in 1985 and as of 2015, it is estimated that about 12 million households participate in the program. Proponents of the funding redistribution say the change is essential to address disparities in access to technology. Opponents, including the two Republican FCC commissioners and some lawmakers, argue that the Lifeline program has been wasteful, inefficient, and abused by participants.
What’s the history of the program? How does it work? How much of the funds would be re-distributed to provide broadband internet? Where is the need most: urban or rural communities? What do we know about the increase in school’s assigning homework that requires internet access? What’s the likelihood that the proposed changes will be approved by the commission? Is the digital divide a result of unaffordable internet access or is it lack of access to computers and devices?
Guest:
James P. Steyer, Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Common Sense Media, a non-partisan organization dedicated to improving media and technology choices for kids and families
The environmental impact of more Amazon customers with free shipping
This week, Amazon increased the threshold needed for non-members to qualify for free shipping as it seeks to add more people to its $99 annual Prime loyalty program.
Non-members must now spend a minimum of $49, up from $35, to get free shipping. Members don't have a minimum. More Prime members would mean more packages for more customers, more delivery trucks and more cardboard.
On the other hand, it will also mean fewer trips to the mall. Are more online shoppers good or bad for the environment? While excessive consumption is problematic, existing studies (which cannot be conducted at the rate of marketplace changes) are split on the environmental impact of e-commerce versus brick-and-mortar shopping.
What are the consequences of more urban freight and likely more packaging?
Guest:
Deepak Rajagopal, Assistant Professor, Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, UCLA
Dan Sperling, founding director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Davis, and the transportation expert on the California Air Resources Board
CA constitutional amendment introduced to lower voting age in some cases to age 16
California’s problem with voter apathy is well known.
To give younger voters a voice in issues impacting them, state Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego) last week introduced a California constitutional amendment that would let 16- and 17-year-olds vote in their local school board and community college district governing board elections.
Gonzalez says that 16-year-olds have the same maturity and decision-making ability as 18-year-olds.
What do you think? Should 16- and 17-year-olds be allowed to vote in limited cases? Would that encourage political engagement in this age group in the future?
Guests:
Lorena Gonzalez, Assemblywoman (D-San Diego) representing the 80th Assembly District, which includes Chula Vista, National City and the San Diego neighborhoods of City Heights and Barrio Logan. She is behind Assembly Constitutional Amendment 7,which would allow 16- and 17-year-olds the right to vote in their local school board and community college district governing board elections; Lorena tweets from
Arthur Lupia, a professor of political science at the University of Michigan. He is Chair of the American Political Science Association Task Force on Improving Public Engagement, and the author of the book, “Uninformed: Why People Seem to Know So Little about Politics and What We Can Do about it” (Oxford University Press, 2015)