Legislation to reduce insurance requirements for Uber and Lyft drivers during a key phase of trips died before reaching its planned destination after gaining limited traction in the Senate and none in the House.

The proposal sought to scale back liability coverage during the “in-between” period when a driver has accepted a ride but has not yet picked up the passenger.

A Senate version of the measure (SB 632), sponsored by St. Petersburg Republican Sen. Nick DiCeglie, received just one hearing last month and advanced 6-3. But it failed to travel further as its House companion (HB 585) by Miami Lakes Rep. Tom Fabricio never got picked up.

Current law requires at least $1 million in coverage for death, bodily injury and property damage throughout the ride process. DiCeglie and Fabricio’s legislation would have lowered that requirement during the pre-pickup window to $50,000 per person and $100,000 per incident for bodily injury, plus $25,000 for property damage — aligning it with coverage levels required when drivers are logged into an app but not actively on a trip.

Once a passenger entered the vehicle, the $1 million coverage requirement would have remained in place.

DiCeglie and industry supporters framed the change as a cost-saving measure that could ultimately benefit drivers and riders. He said he hadn’t seen evidence supporting concerns that drivers behave more dangerously while en route to pick up passengers.

Matthew Van Name, a representative from Lyft — which donated $12,500 to DiCeglie and $10,000 to Fabricio in November; Uber gave Fabricio $5,000 the same month — called the bill a “common sense” adjustment that better reflects actual risk while reducing operational costs that can translate into higher fares and lower driver earnings.

Opponents, however, argued the proposal would weaken protections at a potentially risky moment.

Jacksonville lawyer Matthew Posgay told lawmakers that drivers rushing to pick up passengers may be more prone to negligent driving, making the pre-pickup phase “one of the most dangerous times” of a trip. Lowering insurance requirements during that window, he said, lacked justification.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle also raised concerns about unraveling a 2017 compromise that established statewide rideshare regulations and required $1 million in coverage across all stages of a ride.

Sen. Jonathan Martin, a Fort Myers Republican who voted against SB 632 alongside Democratic Broward County Sens. Rosalind Osgood and Barbara Sharief, warned the change would undercut that agreement.

There were nearly 60 lobbyist registrations on the House version of the legislation, including representatives of the Florida Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, Personal Injury Federation of Florida, Florida Justice Association, Florida Insurance Council, Uber and Lyft, and roughly two dozen insurance and tech businesses.

The post Stuck in neutral: Rideshare insurance rollback dies without House hearing appeared first on Florida Politics – Campaigns & Elections. Lobbying & Government..