On the taxi cab at the airport issue. From the UPoR:
At-large council member David Howard questioned whether the city should revisit the issue “because of newspaper articles.”
“(The cab companies at the airport) haven’t done anything wrong,” he said. “Why add more companies? It seems unfair to me. They played exactly by the rules.”
Translation: Government picking winners and losers is good. And it would be unfair to the anointed winners to have them not be the winners anymore. So yes, the status quo is good, especially for a pol that faces an approximately 0 percent chance of ever being voted out of office and is getting campaign contributions from the winners he helped anoint.
And then there’s this:
At-large council member Michael Barnes also questioned why the city should revisit the issue. “We want the best cars and the best service,” he said. “From my perspective, we have been accomplishing that.”
Which is only half the issue. Kenny Smith, meanwhile, gets it exactly right:
Republican Kenny Smith, who wasn’t on council in 2011, said he didn’t understand why it was the airport’s concern if drivers were choosing to wait for passengers. He also said the airport could have required all drivers to improve their cars while not reducing competition. “The government is picking winners and losers,” Smith said.