🎙️ Voice is AI-generated. Inconsistencies may occur.
One of the things guaranteed by law to Americans with disabilities by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a public transportation option comparable to often inaccessible public transit buses and trains. Known as paratransit, these services take the form of taxis or small buses or vans that are accessible to people with a range of disabilities.
Unfortunately, as I know firsthand as a quadriplegic wheelchair user, in practice, the available paratransit options often require booking trips a day or more in advance and leaving up to an hour earlier or later than you would like. The program has also long suffered from poor on-time performance and circuitous routing. Paratransit users routinely miss job interviews, arrive late to work, or are unable to attend school due to unreliable service—a key factor in the nearly 10 percent unemployment rate among working-age American adults with disabilities, which is roughly triple that of our non-disabled peers.
But there has been a ray of hope for Americans like me with disabilities in recent years: Pioneering transit agencies across the nation have begun integrating companies like Uber and Lyft into their paratransit offerings, a welcome development given the modernizations these companies bring to the table. Unlike the previously available traditional paratransit options, these private companies have access to vast driver networks, sophisticated routing algorithms, and user-centric technology—things people with disabilities appreciate deeply. The results have been transformative, with improved reliability, reduced wait times, and same-day booking capabilities that afford riders with disabilities the flexibility and freedom of choice long enjoyed by the general public. In a 2023 letter, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) highlighted such programs, praising their service quality improvements, and noting how they facilitate independence and promote equity.
Yet despite these promising developments, the potential of paratransit powered by what are known as transportation network companies or TNCs remains largely untapped. Estimates suggest that fewer than 1 percent of paratransit trips nationally are currently serviced by TNCs, a figure that reflects the significant barriers these companies face to enter the market.
Why is such a valuable resource being so criminally underutilized?
The answer is simple: progressive overregulation. An insulting and demeaning progressive paternalism when it comes to Americans with disabilities is further marginalizing us in the name of protecting us.
The problem centers on the FTA's random drug and alcohol testing standards, which rely on frequent, unpredictable testing schedules and strict reporting. These standards are uniquely burdensome for part-time rideshare drivers due to their irregular schedules and incidental participation in paratransit, making compliance nearly impossible. The FTA's one-size-fits-all approach imposes airline-level protocols on part-time drivers.
The FTA recognized that this standard is overly burdensome for part-time drivers. It's why it carved out a more flexible standard for local taxis, which allows for less frequent or scheduled testing. And yet, due to progressive paternalism, the FTA won't allow us disabled Americans to take advantage of this carveout, insisting that part-time rideshare drivers adhere to the same rules as full-time Amtrak engineers and airline pilots.
It's simply nonsensical—from both a regulatory and service perspective.
Recognizing this, a broad coalition of over 15 transit agency operators—NY MTA, NJ Transit, MBTA, DART, PSTA, LA Access and Tri-Met, among others—along with disability advocates and civil rights organizations, approached the FTA last year to plead for a revised guidance to allow more opportunities for private companies like Uber and Lyft to participate in paratransit. Yet despite the coalition's compelling case, which focused on safety and positive rider outcomes, the FTA released a draft policy statement in December 2024, in the last days of the Biden administration, that doubled down on onerous requirements of a bygone era. It went one step further than before, eliminating the taxicab exemptions that allowed TNCs and local cabs a lower standard of testing in certain circumstances.
The revised guidance threatens to halt the nascent growth of private-sector paratransit. It also jeopardizes the 1 percent of existing services, which comprise dozens of programs across the country.
If enacted, these rule changes would decimate dozens of existing TNC-powered paratransit programs across the nation, leaving the revolutionary potential of TNCs largely untapped to the disability community's detriment. Hundreds of thousands of disabled Americans would lose access to this crucial lifeline that was being offered to them through a partnership with the private sector.
Furthermore, the new guideline creates a chilling effect on companies like Uber and Lyft, which wish to expand service offerings for customers with disabilities, as the government's overreach directly hinders their efforts to drive transformative improvements.
This is bureaucracy at its worst.
The FTA's proposed changing guidance walks back decades of its own policy statements, enforcement posture, and even the explicit terms of grants awarded to transit agencies to launch on-demand paratransit pilots and microtransit programs with TNCs. Adding insult to injury, in justifying the new guidance, the FTA painted a revisionist history, insisting that the programs utilizing the taxicab exemption have a mistaken understanding of the regulations—apparently more than a decade's worth of errors that went unnoticed until now.
Most alarmingly, it does this under the auspices of promoting safety and equity for disabled riders. Neither claim is true, and both are offensive to people with disabilities.
On safety, Uber and Lyft provide billions of annual rides to customers with and without disabilities under local and state regulations that American society deems protective. To argue this regulatory framework is inadequate for disabled passengers in the same rideshare vehicles defies logic and offends basic principles of equity. It's akin to mandating separate bus lines or subway cars for riders with disabilities. Moreover, not allowing an entire class of citizens with disabilities access to technological innovations that have revolutionized transportation for virtually everyone else is the antithesis of a level playing field.
I, like many other disabled Americans, feel quite safe riding in an Uber/Lyft knowing Uber/Lyft's safety record and that the ride is GPS tracked.
The FTA's stance is a paternalistic dismissal of self-determination. Individuals with disabilities are fully capable of weighing options and choosing between traditional paratransit and TNC-powered services in accordance with personal preference and circumstance, just as we do in virtually every other sphere of life. Restricting this choice in the name of "protection" is demeaning and antithetical to the ADA's integration mandate.
Sadly, the consequences of the FTA's retrograde approach are all too real. By perpetuating a two-tiered transportation system where antiquated rules make providing spontaneous transportation options virtually impossible for riders with disabilities, it consigns us to second-class status and exacerbates the economic marginalization of the disability community.
The disability community is standing at a pivotal moment. New technologies and service models have the potential to dramatically improve our access to reliable, efficient transportation, but only if we create a regulatory environment that encourages innovation and collaboration.
We call on the FTA to meet this moment by reversing course on its misguided proposal and working hand-in-hand with the disability community to ensure paratransit finally realizes its fundamental purpose as a tool of liberation, rather than limitation, for Americans with disabilities. In doing so, the FTA has a chance to align transportation policy with the ADA's promise of integration and equal opportunity.
Only by embracing innovation and public/private partnerships and resisting the temptation to over-regulate will our nation make long-overdue progress toward meaningfully accessible transportation. Our most vulnerable citizens deserve no less.
Alex Elegudin is the president of Wheeling Forward and former Accessibility Chief for MTA New York City Transit.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
