HARRISBURG — The Pennsylvania House of Representatives has passed legislation prohibiting surveillance pricing by ride-share companies. The bill received a 198-4 vote and will now advance to the Pennsylvania Senate for further consideration.

State Rep. Andre Carroll introduced the measure, which aims to outlaw surveillance pricing by transportation network services. Surveillance pricing involves using consumer information from personal devices or other sources to charge varying prices based on a customer's likely willingness to pay.

"Ride-share services have become an important part of daily life and necessary means of transportation, because these services play such a vital role," Carroll said. He added, "Consumers should be able to trust that they are being treated fairly." Carroll stated, "These are not luxury trips for many people."

Pennsylvania State Representative Jeremy Shaffer said, "This bill prevents egregious behavior from charging extra for rides based on a low battery that you might have on your cell phone, or even what type of cell phone that you might have." The legislation also includes provisions that allow for discounts to identifiable groups, including veterans or teachers.

State Sen. Lindsey Williams announced that she would introduce legislation in the Senate to ban surveillance pricing across a broader range of services. "No one believes the grocery store clerk should be allowed to add 10% to your bill because of what you wore to the store," Williams said. "But that's exactly what happens in surveillance pricing." She asserted that this practice means, "You're being charged more because of who you are, not because the item is more valuable."

According to Williams, Maryland, Connecticut, California, and New York currently have laws in place that ban surveillance pricing. Similar legislation is under consideration in 20 other states and in the U.S. Congress, Williams said. Consumer Reports found that Uber routinely charged customers different prices for identical rides, according to Williams. Uber, however, challenged these findings, citing what it described as flawed methodology, non-representative samples, and a fundamental misunderstanding of the dynamic ride-share marketplace. Uber stated it does not engage in surveillance pricing or customize prices for individual consumers.

In April, Target agreed to pay $5 million to resolve a lawsuit filed by the San Diego County District Attorney's Office. The lawsuit alleged that the company altered prices on its app when customers entered a store.