Uber’s political spending in New York is putting a newly enacted auto-insurance overhaul at the center of Gov. Kathy Hochul’s reelection campaign. Since January, the company has supported more than $13 million in advertising and mailers promoting Hochul and policies associated with her administration, including a television spot featuring children and ending with an appeal to vote for the governor, Gothamist reported.
The spending has several different channels
The ad was funded by Fair and Affordable New York, a group for which Uber is the sole funder, according to Gothamist. State Board of Elections records cited by the outlet show a $1 million expenditure for the new advertisement, while Uber has contributed $3 million to the group overall.
A separate Uber-backed group, Citizens for Affordable Rates, has focused on Hochul’s auto-insurance agenda. It reported $12.7 million in lobbying expenses during the first six months of 2026, according to Streetsblog. The same report said the group made $11.97 million in independent expenditures supporting Hochul between January and June. Those figures describe different categories of political activity; they should not automatically be treated as one combined campaign total.
The distinction matters because lobbying and independent expenditures are not interchangeable. Lobbying seeks to influence government decisions, while an independent expenditure is spending intended to affect an election without being reported as a direct campaign expenditure. The public figures show an unusually large investment around both the policy debate and Hochul’s campaign, but they do not by themselves establish that Uber or the outside groups illegally coordinated with the campaign.
What the insurance changes do
The enacted budget changes the rules governing motor-vehicle injury claims. An analysis by Wilson Elser says the new provision in Civil Practice Law and Rules § 1411(b) bars people found at least 51% responsible for a crash from recovering non-economic damages. The legislation also removes the 90/180-day serious-injury category from Insurance Law § 5102(d), which previously allowed some injured people to pursue non-economic damages when an injury prevented normal activities for 90 of the following 180 days.
A pre-overhaul case illustrates the system the changes replace. In a June 18, 2024 decision arising from a 2021 crash in Suffolk County, the court in Wahrheit v. Ciliotta considered whether the plaintiff met New York’s serious-injury threshold, including the 90/180 category, and denied the parties’ motions. The decision is a single litigation example, not evidence of how frequently such claims succeeded, but it shows how the former threshold could become a central issue in a motor-vehicle case, according to the New York State Unified Court System.
Supporters say narrowing claims can reduce insurers’ costs and eventually lower premiums. That outcome remains prospective in the available evidence. The National Association of Insurance Commissioners reported a national combined average premium of $1,438 per issued vehicle in 2023 and cautioned that differences in state requirements and other factors make direct state comparisons difficult, providing context but not a measure of savings from New York’s 2026 changes, the NAIC said.
Why Uber has a stake
Uber’s own reporting confirms that insurance is a significant regulatory requirement for its U.S. Mobility business. The company’s 2025 annual report says state and local rules impose requirements involving licensing and insurance, among other matters, but it does not quantify how much Uber would save from New York’s reforms, Uber reported.
That gap between a documented policy interest and an unproven financial result is central to the campaign dispute. Uber has said its support reflects agreement with Hochul’s leadership and with the insurance changes. Critics, including Republican challenger Bruce Blakeman, have used the spending to argue that the governor is politically indebted to the company. The spending records establish the scale and timing of the investment; they do not, without additional evidence, prove that the reforms were enacted in exchange for Uber’s support or that drivers have already received lower premiums.
For voters, the immediate question is therefore narrower than whether the advertisements are effective: which dollars paid for campaign messages, which paid for lobbying and which paid for independent expenditures, and what measurable effect the new law ultimately has on insurance bills and injury claims. Those answers will require later filings, insurer rate data and court experience under the revised rules.
