S. 853: Rail Shipper Fairness Act of 2015

114th Congress · introduced 2015-03-24 · Transportation and Public Works · Latest: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

federal

Follow this bill, step by step

Where it came from: introduced 2015-03-24 · official record
Who proposed it: Sen. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI] · what a sponsor is
What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
Where it stands now: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.

What does this mean?

Official title

Rail Shipper Fairness Act of 2015

Plain summary

Rail Shipper Fairness Act of 2015 The Surface Transportation Board (STB) may: issue emergency service orders covering rail carrier shipments moving under contract only if they are part of a regional service order; and require reports, service plans, or other documents that cover shipments moving under contract if such shipments are part of a general report, service plan, or other document that generally covers the geographic area or commodity. Rail carriers shall be liable to any person in federal district court for damages or equitable relief as a result of inadequate or deficient service in violation of federal law. Civil monetary penalties for rail carriers increase from $5,000 to $25,000 per violation. It is U.S. transportation policy to provide for and promote the protection of the shipping public. Shippers may obtain rates to or from any interchange points of two or more rail carriers. When determining whether a rail carrier proposing a rate challenged as unreasonably high has market dominance over the transportation to which the rate applies, the STB shall consider that the rail carrier could have market dominance even in circumstances in which a shipper is served by two carriers. The circumstances involving mandatory reciprocal switching agreements are changed. The STB shall now require a Class 1 rail carrier to enter into a competitive switching agreement if a shipper or receiver (or a group of shippers or receivers) files a petition that satisfies the Board that: the facilities of the shipper or receiver are served by rail only by a single, Class I rail carrier; and there is or can be a working interchange between the Class I rail carrier serving the shipper or receiver in question and another rail carrier within a reasonable distance of the facilities of such shipper or receiver. Competitive switching may not be imposed, however, if: either rail carrier between which such switching is to be established demonstrates that the proposed switching is not feasible or is unsafe, or the presence of reciprocal switching will unduly restrict the ability of a rail carrier to serve its own shippers. The STB must observe specified rules when deciding stand-alone cost cases with respect to a maximum reasonable rate. The STB shall apply a certain formula to calculate a rail carrier's cost of capital. This replaces the current requirement that the STB determine annually which rail carriers are earning adequate revenues. The number of STB members increases from 3 to 5, with no more than 3 of them (currently no more than 2 of them) from the same party. At least 2 members must have a background in shipping or consumer advocacy. The STB must meet regularly.

Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.

What a vote does

A “Yea” vote

If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.

A “Nay” vote

If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.

PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).

What does this mean? (plain words)

Official text

Rail Shipper Fairness Act of 2015

Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate)

AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text

No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.

Limited to a few requests an hour per person.

The strongest published arguments

Arguments for (supporters)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Arguments against (opponents)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Alternatives

Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes

Officials and money

Sponsor: Sen. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI] · 1 cosponsors

Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.

Cosponsors on this site

Sponsor's campaign money: Sen. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI] reported raising $3.5 million (2025–2026). Details. Shown for context only; it does not mean any donor supported this bill.

No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.

Words on this page, explained (1)

Rulemaking: The process agencies use to write regulations that carry out laws passed by Congress or a legislature. Usually an agency publishes a proposed rule, takes public comments, then publishes a final rule.

Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.

Sources

Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate)
Congress.gov
Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-114s853.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/114/s>

Record fed-us-cong114-s853 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong114 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong114