Line 5, a Trump donor, is profiting off a pipeline deal threatening pollution

Donald Trump’s administration is being accused by activists of a quid pro quo as it attempts to fast-track a controversial fossil fuel pipeline proposal in Michigan that would in part be built by a donor with deep financial ties to the president.

While Canadian oil giant Enbridge owns the Line 5 oil and gas pipeline that it is attempting to replace in the Great Lakes region, the contractor is Tim Barnard, who, along with his wife, gave $1m to Trump’s campaign last year, Federal Election Commission records show.

Barnard’s company, Barnard Construction, received more than $1bn to build parts of the border wall, and he is also a prolific Republican donor to state and national candidates and organizations.

Enbridge wants to replace the aging Line 5 that cuts across about 4.4 miles (7km) of seabed in the Great Lakes, which holds more than 90% of the nation’s fresh water, and 21% of the world’s fresh water.

The estimated $1.5bn replacement plan calls for building a tunnel underneath the Great Lakes, which opponents say puts the environment at high risk. They also questioned Barnard’s ability to complete the highly complex project, citing a lack of experience and a history of wage violations.

“Such pay-to-play arrangements among the government and federal contractors are not unusual, but they are increasing in scope under a second Trump administration, and are highly unethical and corrupt the government contracting process,” said Craig Holman, a Capitol Hill lobbyist with Public Citizen, a non-profit that advocates for transparency.

“Contracts oftentimes are awarded based on large campaign donations rather than merit, and it effectively rigs the bidding process against businesses who either cannot afford making large campaign contributions or who refuse to pay to play for government contracts,” Holman said.

Barnard did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Trump administration in late February moved to fast-track federal energy projects that include Line 5 by sidestepping the US Army Corps of Engineers’ environmental review processes. The move was part of the “energy emergency” he declared on his first day in office, which is viewed as dubious because energy production was already near record highs. Some allege it as a payback to oil industry donors who helped Trump get elected.

In addition to the $1m June 2024 donations, Barnard has given millions to Trump administration officials, Republican congressional committees, and other Republican candidates and groups. Among the recipients are secretary of state Marco Rubio, Vice-President JD Vance, former US House speaker Kevin McCarthy, and Texas governor Greg Abbott.

Barnard donated to Trump in 2016, and again in 2019 and 2020, just ahead and just after he received what some lawmakers and other contractors alleged was an illegal no-bid contract to build some of the border wall.

What began as an approximately $143m contract ballooned to more than $1bn in part through a loophole in the competitive bidding process, and critics questioned the spike – Barnard billed taxpayers for about $33m per mile of border wall built, while the government at the time was paying about $20m. Walls under previous administrations cost about $3m per mile, but were slightly smaller in scale.

Jack Reed, the Democratic senator of Rhode Island, at the time called for an investigation over the “no-bid contract to an apparently politically connected, private contractor”.

Meanwhile, Barnard Construction has been sued for failure to pay its workers, and settled with the Tampa Bay Water board over shoddy design work on a concrete reservoir that began to crack, raising concern in Michigan about its ability to build a concrete tunnel. It also appears the company has no experience building the type of tunnel required for the pipeline underneath the lake, the project’s opponents say.

“These are donors who got the contract to build the border wall and it seems like there also is an ulterior motive here – a conflict of interest,” said Levi Teitel, a spokesperson for Progress Michigan, which opposes Line 5. “The fact that the state is even considering working with these contractors that have these shady track records is alarming.”

The pipeline currently transports about 540,000 barrels of oil and liquid natural gas daily across the Mackinac Straits, which connects Lake Michigan to Lake Huron between Michigan’s upper and lower peninsulas. Environmental groups fear an anchor strike or powerful shifting currents that put enormous stress on the aging pipes and could trigger a disaster.

Enbridge’s plans for the replacement line call for a utility tunnel to be dug out 100ft below the Mackinac Straits floor – a design Enbridge claims would protect it from anchors and other threats. Opponents note the tunnel would still be high risk because of the complexity in building it, and because it would be the highest pressure tunnel in the world, if completed.

Stiff political and legal opposition has for seven years held up the new pipeline, and is attempting to shut down the existing line. The Army Corps of Engineers’ environmental review is viewed as one of opponents’ best hopes for derailing the project because of the plan’s clear risks.

Though no legal mechanism for removing Barnard from the project exists, opponents have called on the Michigan governor, Gretchen Whitmer, and her appointees on the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority that oversees the project to sound the alarm about the apparent quid pro quo, and pressure Enbridge.

Whitmer has not publicly said she opposes Line 5, to the frustration of those battling it, said Sean McBrearty, a campaign coordinator with Oil and Water Don’t Mix.

“They have the power to throw some daylight on the project for the public and they’re not doing that,” McBrearty said. “When it comes to this hare-brained scheme to build a tunnel through the most ecologically sensitive part of the Great Lakes, Whitmer is missing in action.”