Freight railroad free-for-all is unacceptable

Our freight railroads need more oversight. A lot more oversight. Privately owned freight railroads responsible for most of the country’s train traffic are responsible for policing themselves.

This means that, at any given time, the public knows little to nothing about what is being transported on the tracks near their homes. These railroads conduct their own inspections and later file their own findings to their sole regulator, the Federal Railroad Administration.

In many states, what little information on train contents and train accidents that is in circulation is often withheld from the public by law.

Left with railroads running railroads, what transpires in the event of an accident is a scuffle over the minimum amount of information that, frankly, has no place in 2023.

For a good example of it, we need only cast our minds back as far as this past April, when questions regarding a train that derailed near Rockwood, Maine, were uniformly stonewalled by the company responsible, Canadian Pacific Kansas City.

Information on the timing of inspections? None given. Information about what was being carried by the train that ran off the rails? None given.

Circumstances that transpired after the derailment were equally galling; rail cars containing hazardous materials weren’t removed in a timely manner and when they were eventually removed, Canadian Pacific Kansas City didn’t bother to empty them of their contents, spilling 500 gallons of diesel into the soil and nearby bodies of water as a result.

Without proper maintenance, tracks deteriorate and pose deadly risks. Experts say a conservative approach to investment in private rail tracks has led to poor standards throughout the country, leading the Federal Railroad Administration to institute extremely low speed limits on dubious lines.

Across the United States, states have tried and failed to establish regulatory roles for themselves, leaving the Federal Railroad Administration as the only official body overseeing rail safety.

Opponents of rail transparency laws have cited concerns about national security and what it might mean to make information available to bad actors. From a business perspective, too, railroads have preferred to keep details under wraps, citing a risk of competitive harm.

The national security argument is entirely speculative. And even if the more softly made commercial argument was very robust, it would not outweigh the public’s right to know. The more we know, the more we can do to better regulate the freight tracks and trains running through our communities. It’s been abundantly clear for some time that we can do better.