$10.2 Million in opposition can’t stop risky California train law from moving forward

Sacramento, California – A powerful coalition of labor unions is backing a controversial proposal to limit freight train lengths in California, despite concerns it could raise consumer costs, disrupt passenger rail service, and violate federal law.

Senate Bill 667, authored by Sen. Bob Archuleta (D-Norwalk), would cap freight train lengths at 7,500 feet — about 125 rail cars — and require wayside detectors every 10 to 15 miles to monitor equipment failures. Trains would also face speed limits and crossing regulations aimed at improving safety.

The push follows the 2023 East Palestine, Ohio derailment, where a 9,300-foot-long train carrying hazardous materials derailed, leading to mass evacuations. Unions, including the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, argue that shorter trains are safer. “Longer trains create greater safety risks,” union representative Ryan Snow told the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee.

Despite independent experts and legislative staff warnings that federal courts would likely strike the measure down, SB 667 passed its first committee hearing this week without a single Democrat voting no. The reluctance to oppose union-backed legislation reflects the outsized influence of labor groups in Sacramento, which have donated at least $9.4 million to lawmakers since 2015, according to Digital Democracy.

Opposition is fierce. The California Chamber of Commerce and a wide array of shipping, agriculture, and timber groups — who have collectively given more than $10.2 million to legislators — warn that shorter trains would increase shipping costs, potentially raising prices for consumers. Rail industry officials also argue that recent technological advances, including sophisticated computer modeling, have already improved freight safety without government intervention.

“Trains get longer because you’re able to pull the same amount of freight with fewer resources,” said Joseph Towers, a rail industry analyst. Shortening trains, he added, would drive up operating costs and hurt efficiency.

Passenger rail advocates are also alarmed. Stacey Mortensen, who oversees Amtrak and ACE service, said more frequent freight trains would worsen commuter train delays, undermining California’s climate goals by discouraging rail ridership. Lawmakers, including Sen. Ben Allen (D-El Segundo), echoed these concerns, citing the already poor reliability of the state’s passenger train network.

Even Democrats who supported moving the bill forward expressed unease. Senate Energy Committee Chair Josh Becker (D-Menlo Park) flagged serious concerns over the bill’s legality and potential impact on goods prices. Nonetheless, he and others voted to advance the measure to the Senate Transportation Committee, where they’ll hear the argument on Monday.

“We’re here to save lives and keep the trains moving,” Archuleta told the committee. But whether his proposal survives the looming legal and political hurdles remains to be seen.