Union Pacific cargo train with multiple box cars approaching the camera as it prepares to cross a level railroad crossing near Jamestown, California, December 17, 2017. (Photo by Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images)

Getty Images

The title of a recent New York Times opinion piece said it all: “Truckers Kill More Than 5,000 People a Year. Regulators Are at Fault.” Within this chilling piece was the basic truth that “In 2023, 5,472 people died in crashes involving large trucks."

About what you’ve just read, it is decidedly not meant to be seen as a critique of trucking. As the same opinion piece by Craig Fuller indicated, the American trucking industry “moves nearly three-quarters of the nation’s goods.” Without trucking, living standards would rapidly decline.

Just the same, 5,000+ deaths per year is a cruel tradeoff for better living standards. Seriously, stop and think what this tradeoff means to a not insignificant number of people who must navigate life without loved ones, including parents and children.

So, as opposed to a critique of trucking, what you’ll read here is a call for government to get out of the way so that the U.S. transportation industry writ large can evolve as quickly as possible on a path to fewer annual deaths. The evolution must include the trucking sector.

Importantly, the positive development of any industry is generally an effect of competition. As competitors get better, those they’re competing with must improve themselves or face a loss of market share.

Which brings us to the proposed merger between rail corporations Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern. Last weekend a news item in the New York Times indicated that “Union Pacific hopes regulators will be convinced this time that its $85 billion acquisition of Norfolk Southern that it detailed for the second time Thursday will be good for the country.” Stop and think about this.

Union Pacific “hopes” regulators will be convinced to let the merger through? Something is terribly wrong with this picture, and not just because Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern have shareholders who should be the sole judges of whether the combination occurs. Much more important is that the merger be allowed so that some of the most prominent names in rail can discover the future of rail.

Which brings us to the basics of Union Pacific’s argument in favor of the merger: it would result in the first transcontinental railroad, plus Union Pacific believes the combination would result in faster service, reduced handoffs, and arguably most important of all, 2.1 million fewer trucks on the road.

About the trucking part of the equation, it rates saying repeatedly that the above paragraph isn’t a knock on trucks or the trucking industry. Once again, trucks move nearly three quarters of U.S. goods. They’re much needed.

Just the same, it’s evident that railroad companies made better by mergers could greatly enhance the movement of goods to all our betterment. That on its own is appealing, but much more appealing is that perhaps through enhanced competition for its outsize role in moving goods around the country, the trucking industry will improve how it operates so that freeways dense with trucks are rendered safer by their presence.

To what you’ve just read, some will say 5,000+ road deaths per year is small relative to miles driven by regular drivers, along with truckers alike. That’s no doubt true, but it’s also unacceptable if a healthier rail system competing with the trucking industry could bring that number down, and perhaps erase it.

It’s yet another reason why the Union Pacific/Norfolk Southern merger should be allowed to take place as soon as possible. As the title of this opinion piece makes plain, it’s about life and death.