AUSTIN — Uber and Lyft are combining to spend up to $1.2 million for a fleet of well-connected lobbyist to get lawmakers on board with a bill allowing the ride-sharing firms to set up shop statewide without the interference of city ordinances.

The companies will officially kick off Thursday a high-dollar legislative showdown with huge ramifications for the future of their industry in Texas at a House Transportation Committee hearing set to highlight an ongoing feud between traditional taxis and new ride-on-demand services accessed by mobile apps.

At the center of the squabble in Austin is a bill from state Rep. Chris Paddie, R-Marshall, that would regulate Uber and companies like it on a statewide basis, giving those firms control of background checks and stripping cities such as San Antonio and Houston of any oversight.

“We need a statewide framework so there’s certainty in the market for these companies that exist today, and so the ones coming about in the future know the rules of the game and can build their model around that,” said Paddie.

The bill has been fiercely opposed by taxi companies worried about being displaced by new technology and by cities who argue Uber’s system for background checks is weak.

Fanning the flames for opponents, the legislative hearing comes as an Uber driver in Houston with a criminal record was accused of sexually assaulting a passenger last week.

Now, Houston officials say that its own internal background check would have flagged the driver if he had sought a permit as required, providing new ammunition for those who argue Uber is eager to skirt city regulations in favor of “very loose rules,” said Tim Reeves, a lobbyist for Yellow Cab.

“Uber wants to be allowed to conduct their own criminal background checks and claims to have a very stringent process in place,” said Reeves. “Yet, you have an instance in Houston where a convicted felon molests a woman.”

At least 19 states are considering legislation related to operations of new transportation network companies and Uber and Lyft both have contracted lobbyists in most of those states.

In Texas, it’s been nothing short of a lobbying bonanza: combined, Uber and Lfyt have contracted with nearly three-dozen lobbyists and could spend upward of six figures on professional influence peddlers, state data show. Meanwhile, the taxi industry is dropping up to $500,000 to press lawmakers to allow cities to continue regulating Uber.

“Lobbying is lobbying,” Paddie said of the behind-the-scenes efforts on behalf of the bill. “Those guys do their job, and I do mine.”

Under Paddie’s bill, regulation of companies like Uber would transfer to the state Department of Motor Vehicles.

Ride-sharing companies would also be granted statewide operating permits, and in some cases rules governing things such as background checks for drivers would be less stringent than ordinances approved in some cities across the state.

At the hearing, the measure is set to face opposition from some local leaders. Officials from Houston are planning to say that the city’s criminal background checks have detected numerous crimes by prospective Uber drivers and that the company’s background check system can be easily manipulated.

San Antonio officials, who have been sparring with Uber and Lyft over local rules, are not expected to testify at the hearing Thursday. Mayor Ivy Taylor declined comment Wednesday. But the city is opposing the bill, arguing the proposed regulations are not as strong as what San Antonio already has on the books.

City leaders last month adopted regulations intended to acquiesce Uber and Lyft by allowing drivers to start operating once they pass the company’s background check, but still requiring them to pass the city background check, including fingerprinting, within 14 days.

Still, Uber and Lyft have stopped operating in San Antonio, citing local rules.

But a lawmaker backing the proposal says the statewide regulation planned under the legislation would fix all of that.

“The epi-center for this debate is San Antonio. You have a city council that worked and tried to salvage Uber’s presence in the community,” said state Rep. Lyle Larson, R-San Antonio, a co-sponsor of the bill. “It’s a win-win for everybody involved.”

Taxi companies are planning to introduce several amendments Thursday, including ones to require fingerprinting and drug testing for drivers, and another requiring Uber drivers to maintain round-the-clock commercial liability insurance.

“If they adopt those amendments, we’ll lock arms with Uber and sing kumbaya in the halls of the Capitol,” said Reeves, the lobbyist for Yellow Cab.

Paddie said he hasn’t seen any proposed amendments from the taxi industry, but has already worked out a compromise on the issue of insurance.

And while saying the situation involving the Houston Uber driver accused of sexual assault was “concerning,” he shrugged off suggestions that fingerprinting is tantamount to a panacea for preventing future crimes.

“No system is perfect,” Paddie said, “and to suggest that fingerprints is a cure all … is disingenuous.”

drauf@express-news.net

The Houston Chronicle's Dug Begley contributed to this report.