The potential Union Pacific merger risks upsetting America's rail industry



Rail transportation is the backbone of the American economy, and a proposed $85 billion merger between Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern threatens to overconcentrate market power in an already highly consolidated industry.

The consequences will ripple across the economy, raising transportation costs, weakening service, and squeezing industries that depend on rail, from agriculture to energy.

At a moment like this, regulators shouldn’t take merger parties at their word. They should demand evidence. That’s exactly what we have called for when it comes to evaluating this mega-merger, and we are pleased that the Department of Justice and the Surface Transportation Board have agreed.

This merger could further entrench consolidation in freight rail, reducing competitive options for shippers and ultimately increasing costs for businesses and consumers.

The Justice Department — in a notable recommendation consistent with its review of mergers outside the rail industry — urged the STB to require that Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern produce certain executive-level information regarding their internal assessments of the merger.

The STB took an important step in that direction on March 18, requiring Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern to turn over internal documents assessing how the deal would affect competition, pricing, and market dynamics.

These are the kinds of materials the Justice Department has long relied on to evaluate mergers because they reveal how companies themselves expect a transaction to play out.

Attorneys general across the country have warned that this merger could further entrench consolidation in freight rail, reducing competitive options for shippers and ultimately increasing costs for businesses and consumers.

The merging companies point to a limited “open gateway” commitment as proof that competition will be preserved. But Union Pacific itself dismissed similar promises in the recent Canadian Pacific and Kansas City Southern rail merger in 2023. Now it asks regulators to accept vague assurances that it will maintain open gateways at “commercially reasonable” terms without enforceable guarantees.

Union Pacific argues that the merger will drive growth, including taking 2 million trucks off the road by shifting their freight to rail. But this is an optimistic forecast that UP would face no repercussions for missing. Indeed, the recent CPKC rail merger has fallen well short of a much more modest target of 65,000 truck-to-railway conversions.

The companies also promise efficiencies and new investments but offer little detail about their pre-merger plans or whether similar gains could be achieved through other means, such as partnerships or joint ventures — much less how any such efficiencies will benefit shippers, rather than shareholders and executives.

RELATED: Digital trade corridors can fix our outdated supply chain

JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images

In other words, regulators are being asked to accept sweeping claims with limited substantiation.

The STB is right to push back on the “just trust us” approach. Internal company analyses can reveal whether executives expect service disruptions, pricing power, or integration challenges that could undermine supply chains.

They can also test whether the merger’s benefits are actually realistic. This level of scrutiny is basic due diligence, particularly in an industry where reduced competition can have economy-wide consequences, and especially when the merging railroads claim that this transaction will change American railroading for the next hundred years.

At a time when businesses and consumers are still grappling with inflation and the cost of goods, it is hard to overstate the risks of this mega-merger.

As this review proceeds, the STB should ensure that all stakeholders have the information needed to assess the merger’s true impact and the time to be heard, resisting pressure to rubber-stamp a deal this consequential for the rail industry and American consumers. Anything less risks locking in higher costs and fewer choices for years to come.

The American economy runs on rail. The STB should make sure it stays on track.

One crash, one derailment — and Congress still can’t follow the data



After a midair collision and a train derailment, Congress faces a simple test: Will it follow the evidence?

In aviation, the Senate’s ROTOR Act would mandate improved aircraft surveillance technology after last year’s deadly midair collision involving a military helicopter and a passenger jet. Yet earlier this month, the House failed to advance the bill after Pentagon opposition — sidelining broader use of Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast, a system that likely would have prevented that tragedy.

Rail risks being locked into prescriptive labor mandates, while aviation safety is undermined by incomplete adoption of proven technology. Neither sector is getting what it needs.

At the same time, a group of senators reintroduced the Railway Safety Act, branding it “data-driven” while again pushing minimum crew mandates — despite no empirical evidence that larger crews reduce accident rates — in response to the 2023 East Palestine derailment.

The impulse is understandable. When tragedy strikes, Washington acts. But acting quickly is not the same as acting on evidence.

If safety is truly the goal, Congress needs to ask a harder question: What actually reduces risk?

The data point in a clear direction. Human error dominates transportation accidents. And the most consistent safety gains in modern transport have come not from adding more people into systems but from improving system design, automation, and structured safety management.

Human error is the core problem

In 2024, roughly 40,000 Americans died in motor vehicle crashes — far outpacing most developed countries on a per-capita basis, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

By contrast, aviation and rail — sectors that have embraced automation and safety management systems — post dramatically lower fatality rates. Commercial aviation in developed countries now experiences fatal accidents at rates below 0.1 per million departures. Federal Railroad Administration data show train accident rates have fallen 33% since 2005, with derailments down significantly and human-factor incidents continuing to decline.

The lesson is straightforward: When systems are designed to reduce human error, safety improves.

RELATED: Female Black Hawk pilot didn't follow orders before horrific crash: Report

Photo by Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Automation works — with caveats

Fully autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicle systems have posted lower crash rates in controlled environments. These results require continued scrutiny and larger data sets, but the direction is clear: Reducing reliance on human reaction time reduces collisions.

The same logic applies in aviation and rail.

Automation now governs the vast majority of routine commercial flight operations. Positive train control has sharply reduced train-on-train collisions and overspeed derailments.

Consider last year’s midair collision. Broader, uninterrupted use of ADS-B In and Out would have provided precise real-time traffic awareness to pilots and controllers. The technology exists to prevent exactly this type of conflict, a point highlighted in the BlazeTV documentary “Countdown to the Next Aviation Disaster,” which presaged the January 2025 Reagan National Airport tragedy. Yet expanded deployment has failed to advance despite bipartisan Senate support.

In rail, meanwhile, some lawmakers are moving in the opposite direction — toward mandates for more personnel.

Symbolic safety vs. structural safety

The East Palestine derailment stemmed from a mechanical failure — an overheated bearing — not a shortage of crew members. There were three crew members on board.

Adding personnel would not have prevented a bearing from overheating. Predictive maintenance systems, sensor networks, and better data integration are the tools designed to catch precisely that kind of failure.

Yet the RSA would codify minimum crew requirements across freight rail operations, regardless of route, cargo type, or level of automation.

This isn’t primarily about risk analysis. It reflects political incentives.

Organized interests exert concentrated influence. Diffuse beneficiaries — consumers, shippers, taxpayers — do not.

Labor interests can organize to protect jobs. The Pentagon can block safety rules it opposes. But the public — which wants safer transportation — is too diffuse to mobilize around specific, technical policy choices. The result is a grab bag of special-interest “safety” measures rather than coherent, risk-targeted reform.

RELATED: Trucks destroy roads, but railroads — yes, rail! — can save taxpayers billions

Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Focus on what works

Freight railroads in the United States are privately funded and capital intensive, investing billions annually in track upgrades, advanced detection systems, and predictive maintenance. Rail remains one of the safest ways to move goods over land because sustained technological improvement compounds over time.

By contrast, the Federal Aviation Administration — a government-run system — has struggled to modernize needed surveillance and air-traffic technologies at speed and at scale. In civil aviation, the FAA has deployed ADS-B across controlled airspace, dramatically improving traffic surveillance and situational awareness. But gaps remain where some defense aviation actors are not required to fully transmit or receive ADS-B data.

Rail now risks being locked into prescriptive labor mandates, while aviation safety is undermined by incomplete adoption of proven collision-avoidance technology. Neither sector is getting the policy it needs.

As Congress considers the RSA, lawmakers should prioritize provisions that directly reduce accident probability. Decades of transportation data point to a consistent lesson: Safety improves when systems are engineered to anticipate and correct human limitations — not when policymakers assume more humans automatically mean more safety. One-size-fits-all crew mandates don’t meet that test.

Nor should Washington abandon expansion of ADS-B and other proven collision-avoidance technologies. The system exists to prevent the very type of tragedy we witnessed. It shouldn’t take another collision for Congress to act.

The evidence isn’t ambiguous. Technology-driven risk reduction works. Symbolic mandates do not. If lawmakers are serious about safety, they need to focus on what demonstrably prevents accidents — and have the discipline to follow the data.

Trucks destroy roads, but railroads — yes, rail! — can save taxpayers billions



Anyone who drives America’s highways knows the story: potholes, cracked pavement, and endless construction zones. States pour billions of tax dollars into road maintenance every year, yet the pavement always seems to crumble faster than it can be repaired. What most motorists don’t realize is that heavy trucks cause much of the damage — and pay almost nothing to fix it.

Federal estimates show that a single fully loaded 18-wheeler can inflict as much pavement damage as nearly 10,000 passenger cars. Fuel taxes and highway user fees from trucking companies cover only a small fraction of the destruction they cause. Taxpayers pick up the rest, footing the bill for constant repaving, bridge work, and the cycle of crumbling roads.

Every additional ton of freight shifted to rail represents pavement preserved and taxpayer dollars saved.

Trucking keeps the economy moving, and freight rail, shipping, and trucking together form the backbone of America’s supply chain. But shifting more freight to rail makes sense. The rail network is self-maintained by the companies that use it, and trains move goods more safely and efficiently than trucks. The more freight we move by rail, the less damage we’ll have to repair on the nation’s roads.

A merger serving Americans

The recently proposed merger of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern offers an opportunity to improve both our roads and our supply chains simultaneously. By creating a more efficient coast-to-coast rail network, the merger would allow railroads to capture more freight that currently travels by truck — relieving taxpayers of billions of dollars in hidden subsidies for road repair.

Merging Union Pacific’s vast western network with Norfolk Southern’s eastern lines would create the nation’s first true transcontinental railroad — from the Pacific to the Atlantic. For shippers, that means single-line pricing instead of juggling multiple operators to move goods from point A to point B.

It also means faster delivery, fewer interchanges, and lower costs.

Railroads, unlike trucking companies, build and maintain their own infrastructure. Every mile of track, every bridge, and every switching yard comes from private capital, not public funds.

When freight moves from trucks to trains, taxpayers win twice: less highway damage to repair and more freight handled by a system that pays its own way.

The savings aren’t theoretical. Heavy trucks cause roughly 40% of the wear on America’s roads while accounting for only about 10% of total miles driven.

A North Carolina Department of Transportation study found that trucks with four or more axles underpay for road damage by anywhere from 37% to 92%. State budgets from Texas to Pennsylvania tell the same story: Highway repair costs soar while trucking fees barely make a dent.

Every ton of freight shifted to rail means less pavement destroyed and more tax dollars saved.

False cries of monopoly

Naturally, critics of the merger will cry “monopoly,” as they always do when industries consolidate. But that misses the real competitive landscape. In addition to competing with other railroads, rail competes vigorously with trucks, which dominate American freight today.

Trucks control roughly 70% of domestic freight volume — subsidized in part by taxpayer-funded roads. Allowing railroads to offer a stronger alternative isn’t anti-competitive — on the contrary, it’s pro-market. It creates stronger competition for taxpayer-subsidized trucking.

RELATED: DOT withholds $40M from blue state for flouting English requirements for truckers

Photo by Eric Lee/Bloomberg via Getty Images

At its heart, this merger is a test of whether the Trump administration trusts the free market to deliver solutions. Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern are not asking taxpayers to fund their merger. They are not asking for subsidies, grants, or carve-outs. They are investing their own capital to create a system that reduces public costs, strengthens supply chains, and keeps America competitive.

If policymakers are serious about preserving America’s battered roads, as well as strengthening our supply chain infrastructure, the choice is obvious. Let the free market work, and let railroads take more freight off the highways.

$50K for DEI Trainings, $5 Mil for Graffiti Removal, and No Rail Line: How California's High-Speed Rail Project Has Burned Through Taxpayer Cash

When the Trump administration announced it was investigating California's long-troubled high-speed rail project, the top official overseeing it pressed back. Though the project has more than tripled in price to $106 billion, the official said that "every dollar is accounted for."

The post $50K for DEI Trainings, $5 Mil for Graffiti Removal, and No Rail Line: How California's High-Speed Rail Project Has Burned Through Taxpayer Cash appeared first on .

WATCH: Biden Announces Plan To Build Massive Railway Across An Ocean

President Joe Biden unveiled this week a new transportation goal for his administration: to build a railway from the Pacific Ocean across the Indian Ocean. "We have plans to build a railroad from the Pacific all the way across the Indian Ocean," Biden told a crowd at a League of Conservation Voters event on Wednesday. A […]

The post WATCH: Biden Announces Plan To Build Massive Railway Across An Ocean appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

WATCH: Karine Jean-Pierre Goes Off the Rails When Asked How Biden’s ‘Environmental Justice’ Order Helps East Palestine

A journalist on Friday asked White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre what President Joe Biden's new "environmental justice" executive order will do for the devastated town of East Palestine, Ohio, prompting Jean-Pierre to ramble on for almost two minutes without answering.

The post WATCH: Karine Jean-Pierre Goes Off the Rails When Asked How Biden’s ‘Environmental Justice’ Order Helps East Palestine appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

The Bipartisan Rail Safety Bill Is A Reasonable Response To East Palestine Crisis

Well-placed anger can create unintended consequences because adding new layers of government control can play right into Big Business' hands.

Dem Senator Says It's No 'Big Deal' If Biden Comes to East Palestine

Democratic Ohio senator Sherrod Brown said during a town hall that whether or not President Joe Biden comes to the devastated town of East Palestine, Ohio, is not "a particularly big deal."

The post Dem Senator Says It's No 'Big Deal' If Biden Comes to East Palestine appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

Two Days After Buttigieg Visit, Biden Admin Halts Removal of Toxic Waste From East Palestine

The Biden administration on Saturday halted the removal of toxic materials from East Palestine, Ohio, to ensure waste is transported to Environmental Protection Agency-certified facilities.

The post Two Days After Buttigieg Visit, Biden Admin Halts Removal of Toxic Waste From East Palestine appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

FACT CHECK: Pete Buttigieg Is a 'Capable and Competent' Leader

Claim: Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, sometimes referred to as Alfred E. Neuman, is a "capable and competent" leader who can stand up to former president Donald Trump.

The post FACT CHECK: Pete Buttigieg Is a 'Capable and Competent' Leader appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.