Don't Cut Down on D.C.'s Cabs
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
D.C. Council member Jim Graham's bill to limit the number of taxicabs in the District [District Extra, July 2] is really an attempt to create a new special-interest group.
A cap on the number of cabs would mean that the well-connected who had medallions would charge handsomely for the privilege of driving. The result would be higher fares, much of which would go into the pockets of medallion owners, not the cabbies. Worse service, such as New York cabdrivers' reluctance to go to outer boroughs, might also result as new drivers are kept out of the market.
The Task Force on Taxicab & Limousine Industry recommended in its recent Final Report that "the District retain the current open taxicab system but place more emphasis on vehicle inspection, driver standards and overall enforcement" of existing laws and standards. "The open system has served the public and the drivers well."
Calls to limit the number of cabs are really attempts to benefit special interests to the cost of District area residents.
DAVID SPLINTER
Arlington
