Vance cobbles together GOP coalition for rail safety bill
David Sivak
Video Embed
Nearly every Republican voted against Sen. J.D. Vance’s (R-OH) rail safety bill when it came before the Senate Commerce Committee last week.
Yet the vote marked a major step forward for the legislation, crafted in the wake of the East Palestine, Ohio, train derailment in February. Not only did the measure advance out of committee with the backing of every Democrat, but Vance also picked up the vote of Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO).
HOW BIDEN HAS STRUGGLED TO KEEP DEMOCRATS TOGETHER ON ENVIRONMENTAL PUSH
The support of two Republicans on a committee with 13 might seem paltry, but it could make all the difference as Vance chips away at GOP opposition to regulating the nation’s railways.
All 51 Democratic senators are expected to support the bill when it gets a vote on the Senate floor in the coming months, meaning it’s up to Vance to deliver nine Republicans to overcome the 60-vote threshold for a filibuster.
Schmitt’s support brought that number to seven.
Passing a rail safety bill would be an enormous win for Vance, a freshman senator from Ohio who has brought to the upper chamber former President Donald Trump’s brand of working-class populism. It would also be one of the first substantive pieces of legislation to clear the Democratic-controlled Senate this year.
Vance’s bill, which would raise safety standards for rail companies and hike the maximum fines charged for infractions, has faced opposition from the business community. The Association of American Railroads said it supports some of its provisions but balks at others, including a requirement for two-person crews.
Senate Republicans have largely joined that opposition, expressing concern that the bill would harm the transport of American energy and raise costs for consumers. Nonetheless, Vance has cobbled together a somewhat unconventional coalition of Republicans willing to buck the Republican Party’s pro-business streak.
Two GOP senators who flirt with conservative populism are original co-sponsors of the bill: Sens. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Josh Hawley (R-MO). Vance has managed to recruit five others in part by agreeing to amend the legislation.
Smaller rail companies are now exempt from the two-person crew requirement, while funds were allocated for commuter railroads to install hot boxes to detect malfunctions on their tracks. The latter, Vance acknowledged, was a concession to the rail industry.
In total, the length of the bill has ballooned from 18 pages to nearly 80 since Vance introduced it with his Democratic colleague, Sen. Sherrod Brown (OH), on March 1.
Sen. Mike Braun (R-IN) told the Washington Examiner he wasn’t on board at first but that Vance’s office worked with him to get “some particulars worked out.”
He, along with two other Republicans — Sens. Mitt Romney (R-UT) and Roger Marshall (R-KS) — announced their support for the bill ahead of the committee vote, giving the legislation a newfound sense of momentum. Vance picked up Trump’s support the same day.
The changes have also been necessary to lock down Democratic votes — several provisions drafted by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), the chairwoman of the Senate Commerce Committee, were incorporated before the panel hearing last week. That includes language to aid firefighters responding to hazardous train crashes like the one in East Palestine, which polluted the area with toxic vinyl chloride.
“I think, fundamentally, part of the amendment process is trying to make the bill better, you try to get more people involved, and you try to address the concerns. I think we got a better bill out of the Commerce Committee in part because of that negotiation,” Vance told the Washington Examiner.
Vance expects he won’t like every change to the bill but has no “red lines” as he builds a broad coalition of support that includes otherwise business-friendly Republicans like Romney.
“There are a few significant priorities I have in the legislation, but I’m open to negotiate on things in order for us to get the best package,” he said.
Nonetheless, Vance is facing a wall of resistance from most Republicans. Sen. John Thune (R-SD), the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, has called the bill a “stalking horse for onerous regulatory mandates and union giveaways” that goes beyond what caused the disaster in East Palestine.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), the ranking member on the Commerce Committee, also raised concerns that the bill would empower “radicals” in the Biden administration to restrict the transport of American energy, particularly liquefied natural gas.
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) echoed Cruz’s objections on LNG in explaining why he voted against the bill in committee last week.
“You know, they’ve been trying to shut down infrastructure, and now, if they have the authority to go after the movement of those goods, I think that’s bad for the country,” he told the Washington Examiner. “Really bad.”
Vance said while he believes his colleagues are arguing in good faith, the bill is part of a larger ideological debate within the party on whether to side with corporations or the blue-collar voters increasingly identifying as Republicans.
“My view is, look, we have to protect our own voters; we have to protect the working-class people who sent us here. And that means demanding some better public safety for the railroads,” he said.
“I think it’s a debate we’re going to win, but it might take some time,” Vance added.
The split is reminiscent of last year’s rail strike, in which Congress stepped in to force unions to accept the terms of a labor deal brokered by the Biden administration. Most Republicans opposed a bid to add seven days of sick leave to that contract, but six joined Democrats in backing a measure that nonetheless failed.
Rubio, Hawley, and Braun were among those who supported the sick leave, as was Cruz.
Today, Cruz is opposed to the rail safety legislation but says he is willing to change his vote if Vance and Brown make further changes, including an amendment to protect the shipment of LNG by rail.
Brown, in turn, has rejected those overtures as unserious, mocking Cruz’s proposed amendment.
“This is a railroad safety bill, not a bill to make it more dangerous to carry something more explosive than happened in East Palestine,” he told reporters. “We’ve already discussed this, we tried to negotiate, and it didn’t go anywhere.”
Vance said it’s too early to say how many senators will vote for the bill but quipped that he got to 58 “without trying that hard.” Without naming names, the senator said he would lump a few more Republicans in the “likely” category, while another dozen he thinks are “very much in play.”
Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), a key centrist Republican, told the Washington Examiner she has been following the legislation but has not decided how she will vote. She does agree, however, with its provision requiring rail companies to notify states when they are transporting hazardous materials.
Both Vance and Brown believe the bill will make it out of the Senate, but they readily acknowledge the bigger challenge will be the House. Vance hopes the lower chamber will consider it later in the summer after the debt ceiling standoff is resolved.
“I think the biggest issue in the House is just one of focus,” he said. “Because we have the majority, because we have the debt ceiling negotiations, there’s just a lot of things on the priority list. And right now, rail safety isn’t one of them.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Brown fears the influence of the rail industry could be an obstacle to the bill’s passage in the House but said their strategy for now is to run up the score in the Senate to give the legislation its best chance.
“The bigger the vote we get in the Senate, the better its prospects in the House,” he told the Washington Examiner.