STB Faces Its Biggest Test: Must Stand Up for Competition WASHINGTON, Dec. 19, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — The Rail Customer Coalition (RCC) today issued a stark warningSTB Faces Its Biggest Test: Must Stand Up for Competition WASHINGTON, Dec. 19, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — The Rail Customer Coalition (RCC) today issued a stark warning

Rail Customers Say Competition Must Come First in UP-NS Merger Review

STB Faces Its Biggest Test: Must Stand Up for Competition

WASHINGTON, Dec. 19, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — The Rail Customer Coalition (RCC) today issued a stark warning regarding Union Pacific’s formal application to merge with Norfolk Southern.

While UP-NS would like to declare victory right out of the gate, the push back regarding the merger is building as it faces the most rigorous review in STB history.

The proposed merger would mark the largest railroad consolidation in U.S. history and the most consequential case ever reviewed by the STB. It is an unprecedented test of the Board’s updated merger standards that were adopted after previous mergers upended the rail network and crippled the national supply chain.

The new standards require an application to clearly demonstrate how the merger will improve service and enhance rail-to-rail competition. The Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern application fails to meet that standard.

Costly Legacy

American businesses are still paying the price for prior rail mergers. Today, just four companies control 90% of U.S. freight rail traffic. As a result, freight rail rates have soared more than 40% (inflation-adjusted) over the past two decades, while rail customers face frequent service disruptions.

Sticker Shock

If approved, this deal would give a single railroad control over nearly half of all U.S. rail traffic. What little competition remains would be erased. A near monopoly power would be created and manufacturers, farmers, energy producers, and ultimately every American consumer would pay the price.

This proposed merger is seven times larger than any previous merger. The $85 billion price tag for the merger will most likely be paid for by U.S. businesses and American consumers.

Unnecessary and Risky

The supposed benefits of the merger — improved service, efficiency, and network reach — can be achieved without creating a rail monopoly. Just look at the recent BNSF—CSX partnership, which expanded service through cooperation, not consolidation.

Union Pacific has challenged the alleged benefits of previous mergers — most recently filing a lawsuit saying the merger between Canadian Pacific and Kansas City Southern was unnecessary and would reduce competition. 

Momentum Shifting

As stakeholders look beyond UP’s and NS’s glowing press releases and promises, opposition continues to grow. A bipartisan group of 18 U.S. Senators recently urged the STB to scrutinize the merger, warning:

“Our producers already face limited competitive options for rail service. Further consolidation could compound these challenges by reducing routing flexibility, constraining network fluidity, increasing market power, and limiting access for both producers and processors.”

And nine Republican State Attorneys General, along with 54 Republican legislative leaders in 24 states have expressed similar concerns to the STB. Momentum has clearly turned against the merger. 

Competition or Bust

More rail-to-rail competition is essential to lowering costs, strengthening supply chains, and supporting American jobs. The STB must apply the hard and costly lessons of past mergers and reject any deal that fails to enhance freight rail competition.

Members of the RCC will carefully review the application filed today and will engage with the STB throughout its review process.

Rail Customers React:

“Our industry supplies the tools that help growers protect their crops and stay productive, and we rely on a rail system that works. Competition in freight rail is essential for predictable service and a resilient supply chain. The STB should take a hard look at this proposal and ensure that this merger supports American agriculture rather than putting new pressure on farmers and the companies that serve them.”

–     Terry Kippley, President and CEO, Council of Producers & Distributors of Agrotechnology (CPDA)

“American refiners and petrochemical manufacturers need competitive, efficient and reliable rail networks to produce the affordable fuels and products Americans depend on every day. Unfortunately, decades of bad service and price increases in the wake of freight rail consolidation leave us and other carload shippers highly skeptical of this merger. Unless the Surface Transportation Board can demonstrate conclusively that it will enhance competition across all modes of transport — especially between railroads — this merger application should be denied.”

–     Chet Thompson, President and CEO, American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM)

“Farmers and ag retailers operate on razor-thin margins, so even a small, artificial cost increase can have a big impact. When rail service is dominated by just a few players, they hold the power to set terms that work for them—not for the shippers and customers who depend on rail to move agricultural commodities, fertilizer, ag chemicals, fuel, and other essential supplies. That imbalance drives up costs and threatens the reliability of our entire supply chain.”

–     Daren Coppock, President & CEO, Agricultural Retailers Association (ARA)

“Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern are trying to fast-track an unnecessary, unwanted, and potentially crippling merger that would create a coast-to-coast rail monopoly – one that puts imports ahead of American-made goods. At a time when the top concern for Americans is the cost of living and inflation, policymakers must stand with consumers and reject any deal that fails to promote competition over monopolies and drives prices even higher.”

–     Chris Jahn, President & CEO of the American Chemistry Council

“Businesses remain unconvinced this mega-merger will resolve the challenges shippers are already facing, including capacity constraints, high rates, and ongoing service issues. As the STB prepares to consider the proposal, the Alliance for Chemical Distribution encourages the board to conduct a rigorous and comprehensive evaluation of the proposal’s merits. It’s clear to those who use freight rail day in and day out that this proposal fails to enhance competition and serve the public’s interest. ACD strongly opposes this merger proposal as it will expand monopolistic control of freight rail at the expense of America’s critical chemical supply chain.”

–     Eric R. Byer, President and CEO of Alliance for Chemical Distribution (ACD)

“Cement manufacturers, who provide the essential materials that constitute America’s roads, bridges, water infrastructure, and so much more, rely heavily on an efficient rail service to get their products to construction sites across the country. The Surface Transportation Board must ensure the proposed merger will result in enhanced competition as it is required to do when considering mergers. The cement industry is concerned the merger could lead to higher costs and lower levels of service for shippers.”

–     Mike Ireland, President and CEO, American Cement Association

“Any approval of the proposed rail merger must include strong, enforceable protections for captive shippers. The minerals industry depends on reliable, competitive rail service to supply the minerals that support American manufacturing, infrastructure, and energy security. Without safeguards, this merger risks further consolidation of market power in the freight rail network at the expense of industries that have no practical alternatives. We support a rail network that is efficient and resilient, but STB’s decision should also guarantee that it is also fair.”

–     Chris Greissing, President, Essential Minerals Association

“FRCA remains opposed to continued consolidation in the rail industry based on past merger experiences resulting in higher rates and degraded service. On behalf of its members, who ship largely via unit train and are served predominately by a single rail carrier, FRCA will be reviewing the proposed merger application on how it meets the new merger rules of being in the public interest and enhancing rail-to-rail competition. If a merger is approved by the STB, promised service improvements, reduced rates, and other competitive protections must be guaranteed for all shippers where the Board will effectively hold the railroad accountable for performance.”

–     Ann Warner, Spokesperson, Freight Rail Customer Alliance

“NITL opposes further consolidation in the freight rail industry based on past merger experiences resulting in higher rates and degraded service. A combined UP-NS railroad would become the largest railroad in the United States with an estimated market share of 40% of all rail traffic. This warrants an extremely thorough review by the STB to ensure that this proposed merger would broadly serve the public interest if it is approved. It is critical that any approval would require meaningful enhancements of rail-to-rail competition for both intermodal and captive carload traffic. The promised benefits of improved service, lower rates, and competitive protections should be realized by shippers of all traffic types. In order to achieve this, the STB must require conditions that protect rail customers from increased market power and hold the railroads accountable for performance failures by providing effective remedies to make adversely affected shippers whole.”

–     Nancy O’Liddy, Executive Director, National Industrial Transportation League

You can find more reactions from RCC members here and from other industry groups here.

About the Rail Customer Coalition

The Rail Customer Coalition (RCC) is a large collection of trade associations representing a broad cross-section of manufacturing, agricultural, and energy industries that depend on the railroads to deliver reliable and affordable service so they can remain competitive in a global market. Their members are essential to a healthy U.S. economy, with operations and employees throughout the country – collectively providing more than 7 million jobs and producing more than $4.8 trillion in economic output.

RCC members are major transportation stakeholders and the largest users of freight rail. They account for more than half of the total volume of cargo shipped by rail and generate more than three-quarters of the revenues collected by the railroads.

Learn more at www.freightrailreform.com

Follow us @RailCustomers

Cision View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/rail-customers-say-competition-must-come-first-in-upns-merger-review-302647055.html

SOURCE Rail Customer Coalition

Piyasa Fırsatı
Railgun Logosu
Railgun Fiyatı(RAIL)
$2.048
$2.048$2.048
-0.24%
USD
Railgun (RAIL) Canlı Fiyat Grafiği
Sorumluluk Reddi: Bu sitede yeniden yayınlanan makaleler, halka açık platformlardan alınmıştır ve yalnızca bilgilendirme amaçlıdır. MEXC'nin görüşlerini yansıtmayabilir. Tüm hakları telif sahiplerine aittir. Herhangi bir içeriğin üçüncü taraf haklarını ihlal ettiğini düşünüyorsanız, kaldırılması için lütfen service@support.mexc.com ile iletişime geçin. MEXC, içeriğin doğruluğu, eksiksizliği veya güncelliği konusunda hiçbir garanti vermez ve sağlanan bilgilere dayalı olarak alınan herhangi bir eylemden sorumlu değildir. İçerik, finansal, yasal veya diğer profesyonel tavsiye niteliğinde değildir ve MEXC tarafından bir tavsiye veya onay olarak değerlendirilmemelidir.

Ayrıca Şunları da Beğenebilirsiniz

Here’s How Consumers May Benefit From Lower Interest Rates

Here’s How Consumers May Benefit From Lower Interest Rates

The post Here’s How Consumers May Benefit From Lower Interest Rates appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Topline The Federal Reserve on Wednesday opted to ease interest rates for the first time in months, leading the way for potentially lower mortgage rates, bond yields and a likely boost to cryptocurrency over the coming weeks. Average long-term mortgage rates dropped to their lowest levels in months ahead of the central bank’s policy shift. Copyright{2018} The Associated Press. All rights reserved. Key Facts The central bank’s policymaking panel voted this week to lower interest rates, which have sat between 4.25% and 4.5% since December, to a new range of 4% and 4.25%. How Will Lower Interest Rates Impact Mortgage Rates? Mortgage rates tend to fall before and during a period of interest rate cuts: The average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage dropped to 6.35% from 6.5% last week, the lowest level since October 2024, mortgage buyer Freddie Mac reported. Borrowing costs on 15-year fixed-rate mortgages also dropped to 5.5% from 5.6% as they neared the year-ago rate of 5.27%. When the Federal Reserve lowered the funds rate to between 0% and 0.25% during the pandemic, 30-year mortgage rates hit record lows between 2.7% and 3% by the end of 2020, according to data published by Freddie Mac. Consumers who refinanced their mortgages in 2020 saved about $5.3 billion annually as rates dropped, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Similarly, mortgage rates spiked around 7% as interest rates were hiked in 2022 and 2023, though mortgage rates appeared to react within weeks of the Fed opting to cut or raise rates. How Do Treasury Bonds Respond To Lower Interest Rates? Long-term Treasury yields are more directly influenced by interest rates, as lower rates tend to result in lower yields. When the Fed pushed rates to near zero during the pandemic, 10-year Treasury yields fell to an all-time low of 0.5%. As…
Paylaş
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 05:59
Two new wallets withdrew 26,241 ZEC from Binance within 12 hours, worth $13.5 million.

Two new wallets withdrew 26,241 ZEC from Binance within 12 hours, worth $13.5 million.

PANews reported on December 28 that, according to Lookonchain monitoring, two newly created wallets withdrew 26,241 ZEC (US$13.5 million) from Binance in the past
Paylaş
PANews2025/12/28 09:13
Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security

Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security

BitcoinWorld Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security Ever wondered why withdrawing your staked Ethereum (ETH) isn’t an instant process? It’s a question that often sparks debate within the crypto community. Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin recently stepped forward to defend the network’s approximately 45-day ETH unstaking period, asserting its crucial role in safeguarding the network’s integrity. This lengthy waiting time, while sometimes seen as an inconvenience, is a deliberate design choice with profound implications for security. Why is the ETH Unstaking Period a Vital Security Measure? Vitalik Buterin’s defense comes amidst comparisons to other networks, like Solana, which boast significantly shorter unstaking times. He drew a compelling parallel to military operations, explaining that an army cannot function effectively if its soldiers can simply abandon their posts at a moment’s notice. Similarly, a blockchain network requires a stable and committed validator set to maintain its security. The current ETH unstaking period isn’t merely an arbitrary delay. It acts as a critical buffer, providing the network with sufficient time to detect and respond to potential malicious activities. If validators could instantly exit, it would open doors for sophisticated attacks, jeopardizing the entire system. Currently, Ethereum boasts over one million active validators, collectively staking approximately 35.6 million ETH, representing about 30% of the total supply. This massive commitment underpins the network’s robust security model, and the unstaking period helps preserve this stability. Network Security: Ethereum’s Paramount Concern A shorter ETH unstaking period might seem appealing for liquidity, but it introduces significant risks. Imagine a scenario where a large number of validators, potentially colluding, could quickly withdraw their stake after committing a malicious act. Without a substantial delay, the network would have limited time to penalize them or mitigate the damage. This “exit queue” mechanism is designed to prevent sudden validator exodus, which could lead to: Reduced decentralization: A rapid drop in active validators could concentrate power among fewer participants. Increased vulnerability to attacks: A smaller, less stable validator set is easier to compromise. Network instability: Frequent and unpredictable changes in validator numbers can lead to performance issues and consensus failures. Therefore, the extended period is not a bug; it’s a feature. It’s a calculated trade-off between immediate liquidity for stakers and the foundational security of the entire Ethereum ecosystem. Ethereum vs. Solana: Different Approaches to Unstaking When discussing the ETH unstaking period, many point to networks like Solana, which offers a much quicker two-day unstaking process. While this might seem like an advantage for stakers seeking rapid access to their funds, it reflects fundamental differences in network architecture and security philosophies. Solana’s design prioritizes speed and immediate liquidity, often relying on different consensus mechanisms and validator economics to manage security risks. Ethereum, on the other hand, with its proof-of-stake evolution from proof-of-work, has adopted a more cautious approach to ensure its transition and long-term stability are uncompromised. Each network makes design choices based on its unique goals and threat models. Ethereum’s substantial value and its role as a foundational layer for countless dApps necessitate an extremely robust security posture, making the current unstaking duration a deliberate and necessary component. What Does the ETH Unstaking Period Mean for Stakers? For individuals and institutions staking ETH, understanding the ETH unstaking period is crucial for managing expectations and investment strategies. It means that while staking offers attractive rewards, it also comes with a commitment to the network’s long-term health. Here are key considerations for stakers: Liquidity Planning: Stakers should view their staked ETH as a longer-term commitment, not immediately liquid capital. Risk Management: The delay inherently reduces the ability to react quickly to market volatility with staked assets. Network Contribution: By participating, stakers contribute directly to the security and decentralization of Ethereum, reinforcing its value proposition. While the current waiting period may not be “optimal” in every sense, as Buterin acknowledged, simply shortening it without addressing the underlying security implications would be a dangerous gamble for the network’s reliability. In conclusion, Vitalik Buterin’s defense of the lengthy ETH unstaking period underscores a fundamental principle: network security cannot be compromised for the sake of convenience. It is a vital mechanism that protects Ethereum’s integrity, ensuring its stability and trustworthiness as a leading blockchain platform. This deliberate design choice, while requiring patience from stakers, ultimately fortifies the entire ecosystem against potential threats, paving the way for a more secure and reliable decentralized future. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Q1: What is the main reason for Ethereum’s long unstaking period? A1: The primary reason is network security. A lengthy ETH unstaking period prevents malicious actors from quickly withdrawing their stake after an attack, giving the network time to detect and penalize them, thus maintaining stability and integrity. Q2: How long is the current ETH unstaking period? A2: The current ETH unstaking period is approximately 45 days. This duration can fluctuate based on network conditions and the number of validators in the exit queue. Q3: How does Ethereum’s unstaking period compare to other blockchains? A3: Ethereum’s unstaking period is notably longer than some other networks, such as Solana, which has a two-day period. This difference reflects varying network architectures and security priorities. Q4: Does the unstaking period affect ETH stakers? A4: Yes, it means stakers need to plan their liquidity carefully, as their staked ETH is not immediately accessible. It encourages a longer-term commitment to the network, aligning staker interests with Ethereum’s stability. Q5: Could the ETH unstaking period be shortened in the future? A5: While Vitalik Buterin acknowledged the current period might not be “optimal,” any significant shortening would likely require extensive research and network upgrades to ensure security isn’t compromised. For now, the focus remains on maintaining robust network defenses. Found this article insightful? Share it with your friends and fellow crypto enthusiasts on social media to spread awareness about the critical role of the ETH unstaking period in Ethereum’s security! To learn more about the latest Ethereum trends, explore our article on key developments shaping Ethereum’s institutional adoption. This post Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security first appeared on BitcoinWorld.
Paylaş
Coinstats2025/09/18 15:30