For generations of American families, railroading has been more than a job; it has been a way of life. Parents passed down careers to their children. Communities grew around rail hubs. Entire family trees were built on the promise that hard work on the railroad could create opportunity and stability for the next generation.
That is why rail safety matters.
Recommended Stories
Not because it is a political talking point in Washington, but because every decision affects real people who expect to come home safely at the end of the day and who hope their children might someday have the same opportunity.
OPINION: THE RAILWAY SAFETY ACT WOULD STAND IN THE WAY OF ENERGY ABUNDANCE
Which is exactly why Congress is in danger of solving the wrong problem.
Following the Norfolk Southern derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, in 2023, lawmakers understandably wanted to act. The Railway Safety Act, originally introduced by then-Sen. JD Vance, emerged from that moment with the goal of improving rail safety. But if Congress is serious about preventing future accidents, it should reject policies that make headlines and focus instead on policies that address the actual causes of accidents.
As Congress prepares a new Surface Transportation Reauthorization bill in 2026, elements of the Railway Safety Act are returning, including a proposal to mandate two crew members in the operating cab of Class I freight trains. At first glance, the logic feels obvious: more people must mean more safety. But that assumption deserves scrutiny.
The train involved in the East Palestine derailment did not operate with one crew member. It had three. That does not mean staffing never matters. It does mean policymakers should be able to answer a simple question: If staffing levels were not the cause of the accident, why has staffing become the centerpiece of the solution?
Across the country, millions of Americans safely ride systems that operate differently. Washington Metro, along with many Amtrak and commuter rail services, operates under staffing models that do not mirror the mandate now being proposed for freight rail and continue to meet established safety standards.
Freight and passenger rail are not identical. But the principle remains: safety outcomes should drive policy, not assumptions.
History gives us another reason to be cautious.
America has already seen what happens when railroads become less flexible, more expensive to operate, and slower to adapt. Rail service contracts. Investment slows. Jobs disappear. Communities lose opportunity. Eventually, taxpayers are asked to help carry the burden.
Railroad families pay the price.
Congress should not repeat that mistake in the name of safety. Instead, lawmakers should reject one-size-fits-all crew mandates and focus on reforms that can actually improve safety and strengthen the industry at the same time: accelerating the adoption of proven detection technologies, modernizing infrastructure, improving inspection practices, encouraging investment in equipment, and giving railroads the flexibility to adapt to changing operational realities.
Because rail safety is too important to become a symbolic political victory.
RESTORING AMERICA: PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS FOLLOW-THROUGH, NOT SYMBOLISM
The question Congress should ask is not whether a proposal sounds tough. It is whether it would have prevented the next East Palestine. If the answer is no, lawmakers should keep looking.
Railroad families, and the future of American transportation, deserve policies measured by outcomes, not intentions.
Phil Bell is the CEO of Tower K Group, a fundraising and public affairs firm. He is also a board member of Families for America.
