Trump Donor Line 5 Profiting from Controversial Pipeline Deal with Pollution Risks | Trump Administration

Activists are accusing Donald Trump’s administration of engaging in a quid pro quo as it seeks to expedite a controversial fossil fuel pipeline project in Michigan, which is partly set to be constructed by a donor with significant financial connections to the president.

The Line 5 oil and gas pipeline, owned by Canadian oil giant Enbridge, is being replaced in the Great Lakes region. The contractor for this project is Tim Barnard, who, alongside his wife, donated $1 million to Trump’s campaign last year, as per Federal Election Commission records.

Barnard’s company, Barnard Construction, has been awarded over $1 billion for work on sections of the border wall, and he is a significant Republican donor to various state and national candidates and organizations.

Enbridge aims to replace the aging Line 5, which traverses around 4.4 miles (7 km) of seabed in the Great Lakes that contain more than 90% of the nation’s fresh water and 21% of the world’s fresh water.

The proposed $1.5 billion replacement project includes constructing a tunnel beneath the Great Lakes, a plan that critics say poses significant environmental risks. They also raise concerns about Barnard’s qualifications for completing such a complex project due to his lack of relevant experience and previous instances of wage violations.

“Pay-to-play arrangements between government entities and federal contractors are not uncommon, but they seem to be growing in scale under a potential second Trump administration. These practices are highly unethical and corrupt the government contracting system,” stated Craig Holman, a lobbyist with Public Citizen, a nonprofit advocating for transparency.

“Contracts are frequently awarded based on substantial campaign contributions rather than merit, effectively rigging the bidding process against businesses that either lack the resources for large donations or choose not to engage in such practices,” Holman explained.

Barnard did not respond promptly to a request for comment.

In late February, the Trump administration moved to fast-track federal energy projects, including Line 5, by bypassing the US Army Corps of Engineers’ environmental review processes. This initiative was part of the “energy emergency” declared on his first day in office, a designation that appears questionable given that energy production was already nearing record levels. Critics suggest this could serve as a favor to oil industry contributors who supported Trump’s election.

In addition to the $1 million donation made in June 2024, Barnard has contributed millions to Trump administration officials, Republican congressional committees, and multiple Republican candidates and organizations. Recipients include Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Vice-President JD Vance, former US House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, and Texas Governor Greg Abbott.

Barnard contributed to Trump in 2016 and again in 2019 and 2020, leading up to and following what some legislators and contractors have claimed was an illicit no-bid contract for constructing parts of the border wall.

These are donors who got the contract to build the border wall, and it seems there is also an ulterior motive here – a conflict of interest.

What initially began as an estimated $143 million contract has inflated to over $1 billion, partly due to a loophole in the competitive bidding system. Critics point out that Barnard charged taxpayers around $33 million per mile for the border wall construction, whereas the government was paying approximately $20 million at that time. Walls constructed under previous administrations cost about $3 million per mile but were marginally smaller.

Democratic Senator Jack Reed from Rhode Island previously called for an investigation into the “no-bid contract awarded to a seemingly politically connected, private contractor.”

In addition to this, Barnard Construction has faced lawsuits for failing to pay its workers and has settled with the Tampa Bay Water board due to subpar design work on a concrete reservoir that began to crack, raising concerns in Michigan about its capabilities to construct a concrete tunnel. Opponents argue that the company lacks experience in building the specific type of tunnel needed for the pipeline beneath the lake.

“These are donors who secured the contract for the border wall, and there appears to be an ulterior motive here – a conflict of interest,” remarked Levi Teitel, a spokesperson for Progress Michigan, which opposes Line 5. “The state’s consideration of working with these contractors, who have questionable track records, is concerning.”

The existing pipeline transports about 540,000 barrels of oil and liquefied natural gas each day across the Mackinac Straits, which link Lake Michigan with Lake Huron between Michigan’s upper and lower peninsulas. Environmental advocates are worried about the potential for an anchor strike or severe currents that could stress the aging pipes and lead to a disaster.

Enbridge’s replacement plan includes a utility tunnel to be constructed 100 feet below the Mackinac Straits floor. Enbridge claims this design will safeguard it from anchors and other dangers. However, opponents caution that constructing the tunnel remains highly risky due to its complexity, and if completed, it would become the highest pressure tunnel in the world.

Intense political and legal opposition has prolonged the delay of the new pipeline for seven years, with efforts underway to shut down the current line. The Army Corps of Engineers’ environmental review is considered one of the opponents’ best hopes for halting the project due to its clear risks.

While there are no legal avenues available to remove Barnard from the project, opponents are urging Michigan’s governor, Gretchen Whitmer, and her appointees on the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority overseeing the project to raise concerns about the apparent quid pro quo and to pressurize Enbridge.

Governor Whitmer has not publicly indicated her opposition to Line 5, which frustrates activists fighting against it, according to Sean McBrearty, a campaign coordinator with Oil and Water Don’t Mix.

“They have the ability to bring the project into the public eye and are not taking action,” McBrearty stated. “In the face of this ill-conceived plan to build a tunnel in the most ecologically sensitive area of the Great Lakes, Whitmer is notably absent.”