After the East Palestine Derailment, Congress Is Trying To Force Unrelated, Costly Regulations on Railroads
A bipartisan bill backed by J.D. Vance and Sherrod Brown would include a two-member crew mandate that unions have long sought—and that wouldn't have prevented the Ohio disaster.

In the wake of the ugly freight train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, last month, a bipartisan group of senators has proposed a bill they say would overhaul safety regulations for American railroads.
The bill also includes, perhaps unsurprisingly, a number of provisions that seem to have nothing to do with the cause of the Ohio accident that garnered national attention after hazmat crews conducted controlled burns of potentially toxic substances. Instead, the bill would deliver a costly new union-favored mandate to the railroad industry, making it more expensive to ship goods across the country for little (or no) safety benefit.
Tucked into the 18-page Railway Safety Act introduced by Sens. Sherrod Brown (D–Ohio) and J.D. Vance (R–Ohio) is a provision mandating that "no freight train may be operated without a 2-person crew." As Reason has previously reported, the two-person crew mandate is something railroad labor unions have been seeking for years as a way to maintain staffing levels as trains become more and more automated.
More highly automated trains are both safer and cheaper. Since the advent of positive train control (PTC)—essentially a computer-based override system that monitors speed and track signals to avert collisions, and which railroads have been mandated by Congress to use since 2008—rail accidents and employee injuries have fallen. Data from the Association of American Railroads (AAR), an industry group, show accidents are down 30 percent since 2000, while employee injuries have fallen by more than 40 percent. Meanwhile, a 2015 study by Oliver Wyman, a consulting firm, and the AAR found that switching from two-person to one-person crews could save railroads $2.5 billion over a decade.
The federal government's own railroad, Amtrak, ditched its two-person crew requirement all the way back in the 1980s. That means Vance and Brown's bill would be imposing an expensive new rule on freight trains—supposedly in the name of safety—that wouldn't apply to trains carrying passengers.
And then there's this inconvenient detail: The train that derailed in East Palestine actually had three crew members on board.
In some ways, the Railway Safety Act looks like the kinds of bills that get batted around in the aftermath of mass shootings. Those proposals often aim to place more restrictions on legal and law-abiding gun owners or prohibit cosmetic upgrades that anti-gun activists dislike, but rarely (if ever) do they address the circumstances that led directly to a tragic event.
The same seems to be true here. While the investigation into the accident is ongoing, all indications so far point to two causes that worked in tandem to derail the Norfolk Southern train in East Palestine. The primary cause was an overheated wheel bearing, which failed and caused the train to derail as the crew was attempting to bring it to a stop after being alerted to the potential problem. The secondary cause was a possible delay in getting that alert to the crew. At least one trackside sensor meant to look for overheated wheels—known as a "hotbox detector"—along the train's route did not function properly. By the time the crew was alerted to the problem, it was too late.
Hotbox detectors aren't infallible, clearly, but they've got a long track record of success. A 2019 Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) report found that "accident rates caused by axle and bearing-related factors have dropped 81 percent since 1980 and 59 percent since 1990 due to the use of [hotbox] detectors." Doubling down on that technology seems like a good bet.
In response to the derailment in East Palestine, Norfolk Southern announced plans to install more hotbox detectors along its routes. The National Transportation Safety Board and the FRA have indicated they may implement new rules for hotbox detectors and other automated trackside safety equipment—and change how crews are expected to respond to alarms from those sensors. That seems like a targeted, focused, and likely effective response to prevent another accident like this one.
By contrast, members of Congress ought to ask themselves what a two-man crew mandate would have done to prevent the derailment. If anything, the East Palestine derailment was the result of there being too little automation in the operation of freight trains, not too much.
But that's not a satisfactory answer to the political forces on either side of the aisle who favor dragging railroads backward to the times when they operated less safely and less efficiently. The White House, in a statement that notably did not mention the two-person crew mandate, says the bill is full of "commonsense rail safety measures" and encouraged Congress to pass it quickly. Conservative groups that are part of the "New Right" have signaled their support for the bill, and Vance is joined by Sens. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.) and Marco Rubio (R–Fla.) in sponsoring it.
More sensors along the tracks might have prevented the mess, but an extra union worker in the engine's cab wouldn't have saved the day—and, indeed, didn't. It makes no sense to use this accident as an excuse to pile a costly, unnecessary mandate on American railroads—but that's exactly what Biden, Brown, Rubio, and Vance seem determined to do.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
If Congress did not create expensive but useless solutions what would they do?
Go home and make our lives worse by working in civil law?
I am making over $20 k a month working part time. I am a full time college student and just working for 3 to 4 hrs a day. Everybody (der-02) must try this home online job now by just using this
Following Website———->> http://Www.Smartjob1.com
Ensure Liberty and Justice for all?
""After the East Palestine Derailment, Congress Is Trying To Force Unrelated, Costly Regulations on Railroads""
That's what government does best.
.
The good news is, we can expect self-driving cars that fail to detect internal thermal irregularities any day now.
Paraphrasing Warren Bennis (again): The self-driving vehicle of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment.
I’m paid $185 per hour to complete the task using an Apple laptop. I absolutely didn’t think it was conceivable, but my dependable buddy convinced me to give this straightforward an03 chance a go after she made $26,547 in just 4 weeks working on it. Visit the following page to find out additional
.
.
instructions—————————>>> http://Www.jobsrevenue.com
My gut reaction is that having no one but the conductor on board a two-mile-long freight train is a bad idea, but I'm not an expert.
Engineer.
Yeah. Fare to point out that the trains generally do still have Conductors, they just don't ride in the cab. The "three crew members" link details the situation pretty well. The engineer is, from departure to arrival, never to leave the cab (should the train run away), but the conductor is generally commuting by other ground transports some part of the way along the route should the train stop and need attention.
"but rarely (if ever) do they address the circumstances that led directly to a tragic event."
In the case of mass casualty shooters, doing so would require facing hard truths about our society. It's clear that the source of that problem is the dissolution of the family, aggravated by reckless prescribing of psychiatric drugs for kids.
Let's suppose you're right - mass casualty shootings are caused by "dissolution of the family, aggravated by reckless prescribing of psychiatric drugs for kids". What should the government do about it, if anything? What should individuals do about it, if anything?
Stop encouraging it would be a start.
Who precisely should stop encouraging what?
Democrats, like you.
Government, not much.
Individuals: shame, ridicule, blame, religion.
Sounds like you are describing the 1950s. A person who deviated from social norms was shamed and blacklisted from polite society.
Shamed and blacklisted? Like the people who attempt to groom and sexualize small children?
Good.
I'm sure somehow, that open borders are to blame.
Or at least Trump.
Why did the accident happen? Not enough rules. What's the solution? More rules.
When your only tool is a hammer...
If you don't have a hammer, many other tools and objects can be substituted.
Chris Knight on line 2 ...
It's my understanding there were 3 warnings that were ignored. Why don't we know the names of the crew? Why hasn't the crew been on TV to explain what happened? Who authorized the dump and burn? Literally nothing about the accident has been explained in any satisfactory way.
Why don’t we know the names of the crew?
Probably for their own protection.
The warnings arguably weren't ignored. The warning levels were set catastrophically close to catastrophic failure.
Of course, there's never a real engineer around when you need one.
Moar training needed.
Last month i managed to pull my first five figure paycheck ever!!! I’ve been working for this company online for 2 years now and i never been happier.They are paying me $95/per hour and the best thing is cause i am not that tech-savy, they only asked for basic understanding of internet and basic typing skill.It’s been an amazing experience working with them and i wanted to share this with you, because they are looking for new people to join their team now and i highly recommend to everyone to apply…
Visit following page for more information……………..>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
In some ways, the Railway Safety Act looks like the kinds of bills that get batted around in the aftermath of mass shootings. Those proposals often aim to place more restrictions on legal and law-abiding gun owners or prohibit cosmetic upgrades that anti-gun activists dislike, but rarely (if ever) do they address the circumstances that led directly to a tragic event.
You can add the anti-social-media legislation that Team Red wants to pass (and is now passing in places like Utah). The stated motivation is "to protect the kids" but in reality they wind up hassling adults, and ultimately harming the rights of adults.
Government shouldn't be the Big Brother Parent for everyone's kids. It is up to parents to decide what is best for their own kids.
Except when the kids want to chop off their genitalia, then keep that from the evil parents.
Nope, parents are in charge of parenting decisions for their kids even for trans kids.
I would ask you where you draw the line, but I know I wouldn't get a straight answer.
If you believe that, then you should be willing to condemn the ongoing democrat effort for activist educators and administrators to ‘counsel’ and ‘refer’ young students, regrading sexuality and transitioning, without the consent, or even knowledge, of their parents.
>>but that's exactly what Biden, Brown, Rubio, and Vance seem determined to do.
are you starting to pick up on the theme, Stratego?
Who could have known democrats love and advertised increasing regulations and strategically voted against it...
The federal government's own railroad, Amtrak, ditched its two-person crew requirement all the way back in the 1980s.
Statement does not match article. Article says it ditched it for the Northeast Corridor. No mention made of any other corridors.
...and that wouldn't have prevented the Ohio disaster.
I agree with this statement. Now ask: Are there other disasters which have been prevented?
I'm an Engineer (not a train conductor). I have to deal with systems going wrong in new and creative ways. Sometimes having a second person does help when something screwy occurs. Maybe the central train control system fixes that. Maybe more is needed. Saying it wouldn't have done anything in this particular case is a terrible argument. Give me the argument for how it'll never be of use instead or why something else is superior.
Two-person crews are vital. I have many railroader friends who are totally against the drive to eliminate the conductor position, leaving only the engineer in the cab. Sure, they don't want jobs eliminated but strangely enough they also want to be able to do their jobs safely and well, too. Putting a 2-mile long train in the hands of one person is putting profits before safety. The railroads already do too much of that as it is. Also, this is not what PTC was meant to accomplish.
Last month i managed to pull my first five figure paycheck ever!!! I’ve been working for this company online for 2 years now and i never been happier.They are paying me $95/per hour and the best thing is cause i am not that tech-savy, they only asked for basic understanding of internet and basic typing skill.It’s been an amazing experience working with them and i wanted to share this with you, because they are looking for new people to join their team now and i highly recommend to everyone to apply…
Visit following page for more information……………..>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
"More sensors along the tracks might have prevented the mess..." Aren't the second and third words of this quote not quite right? Shouldn't it be "...senators on...?"
What percentage of railroad track actually have PTC available?
Not too many years back it was pretty low.