Poll Finds 71% of Voters Oppose Proposed Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern Rail Merger

WASHINGTON — A new national poll released in late April found that 71% of likely voters oppose the proposed $85 billion merger between railroad giants Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern. The survey, commissioned by the newly formed Stop the Rail Merger Coalition, highlights widespread public and business-sector anxiety over the potential for the deal to create a rail monopoly that could increase shipping costs and consumer prices. The poll, conducted by the firm McLaughlin & Associates, revealed that opposition to the merger is strong across the political spectrum. Only 20% of respondents expressed support for the deal. The findings suggest a deep-seated concern among Americans that further consolidation in the freight rail industry would harm the economy. According to the poll’s details, a majority of voters believe the merger would lead to higher costs for shipping goods by rail, which would in turn raise prices on everyday products and negatively impact jobs. Public skepticism extends to the potential benefits touted by the companies. The survey found that 68% of voters believe the merged entity would retain any cost savings for itself rather than passing them on to businesses or consumers. This sentiment reflects a broader distrust of corporate consolidation, with nearly 70% of respondents—including Republicans, Democrats, and Independents—agreeing with a statement from Vice President J.D. Vance that “when one or two companies dominate an entire sector, it’s bad for liberty and it’s bad for prosperity.” The political implications of the proposed merger are also significant, as 54% of those polled said they would be more likely to support a political candidate who actively opposes the deal. Union Pacific reportedly proposed the merger just a day before the two companies were scheduled to file a revised application with regulators, intensifying the focus on the deal's potential market impacts. The Stop the Rail Merger Coalition, which launched to formalize opposition, includes a growing group of over 100 state and federal policymakers, attorneys general, and agriculture secretaries. The coalition argues that the poll confirms what shippers, workers, and businesses already fear: the merger would result in fewer choices and higher costs for everyone reliant on the nation's freight network. Various industry groups have voiced specific concerns about how a combined Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern would affect their operations. The agricultural sector, which depends heavily on rail to move goods from farms to markets, has been particularly vocal. Zippy Duvall, President of the American Farm Bureau Federation, stated that the merger would create greater consolidation and drive up costs at a time when farmers are already facing significant economic pressures. “Farmers and ranchers rely heavily on rail service to get products to families across the country,” Duvall said in a statement released by the coalition. “Ultimately, those costs ripple far beyond the farm gate, impacting not only the price of food for Americans, but also likely pushing farm margins even lower.” The opposition taps into a long history of antitrust concerns in the U.S. railroad industry, which was the nation’s first big business and the subject of early anti-monopoly efforts. The formation of railroad pools and cartels in the late 19th century to control prices and limit competition led to the first major federal regulations of private industry. The current debate echoes these historical precedents, with critics arguing that a merger of this scale would unwind decades of policy aimed at ensuring competitive freight markets. In our experience, small and mid-sized businesses are right to be wary of this kind of large-scale consolidation. While headlines focus on the multi-billion-dollar figures, the real impact is felt on the ground by companies whose supply chains depend on reliable and affordable freight. A reduction in carrier options almost invariably leads to higher prices and diminished service quality, squeezing margins for businesses that lack the negotiating power of larger corporations. We have seen clients forced into costly operational pivots when a key logistics partner is acquired or changes its service routes. This is not a theoretical risk; it is a direct threat to operational stability and profitability. Proactive planning is essential, as the fallout from a merger of this magnitude requires a complete re-evaluation of a company’s logistics strategy. For businesses concerned about these disruptions, the first step is a thorough review of their current shipping dependencies, which is a core part of our supply chain optimization services. C&S Finance Group LLC helps clients build resilient supply chains that can withstand market shocks, and you can learn more at csfinancegroup.com. With public sentiment and a growing coalition of policymakers aligned against the deal, the focus now shifts to the federal regulatory bodies that will review the proposal, primarily the Surface Transportation Board (STB). The findings of this poll will undoubtedly be used by opponents to lobby regulators and lawmakers to block the merger. The outcome of this fight will likely set a significant precedent for how antitrust and competition policy is applied to critical infrastructure industries in the years to come.