Transportation Lobbyists’ Donations to Wisconsin Candidate Raise Ethical Questions
The $16 billion Hudson Tunnel Project, vital for improving passenger rail service between Manhattan and New Jersey, has turn into an unlikely focal point in a Wisconsin congressional race, raising concerns about potential conflicts of interest. Lobbying efforts surrounding the stalled federal funding for the tunnel project have intersected with the campaign of Michael Alfonso, a political newcomer running in Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional District.
White House Funding Freeze and Lobbying Surge
After the White House froze federal grant funding for the Hudson Tunnel Project in the fall of 2025, citing concerns about diversity and equity measures, lobbyists with a vested interest in the project began donating to Alfonso’s campaign. This occurred despite Alfonso having limited influence over the tunnel project itself. The donations, totaling $2,500 from Venture Government Strategies lobbyists, have drawn scrutiny due to the connection between Alfonso and his father-in-law, Sean Duffy, the current Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Duffy’s Involvement and Potential Conflicts
Alfonso’s campaign has benefited from more than just financial contributions. Duffy has actively supported his son-in-law’s candidacy, appearing at campaign events and offering endorsements. This involvement, while legally permissible as long as it occurs during personal time and doesn’t involve government resources or promises of official action, has raised ethical questions. The timing and nature of the donations, particularly from those who had not previously contributed to Duffy or his predecessor, Tom Tiffany, suggest a potential attempt to gain influence through Alfonso’s familial connection to the Transportation Secretary.
A Pattern of Influence
This situation echoes past instances of potential conflicts of interest within the Trump administration. Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao faced criticism for allegedly giving preferential treatment to Kentucky officials for infrastructure grants, a state with ties to her husband, Senator Mitch McConnell. Similarly, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack addressed concerns about the separation between his department’s business and his wife’s congressional campaign in 2012.
Donors with Transportation Interests
A ProPublica analysis revealed that Alfonso’s donors include individuals and organizations with significant stakes in the transportation sector. Jeffrey Miller, a finance chair of Trump’s most recent inaugural committee, and his company’s chief operating officer donated a combined $8,500 to Alfonso’s campaign. Miller’s firm, Miller Strategies, lobbies the Transportation Department on behalf of numerous companies, including those involved in aviation, rail, and infrastructure projects. Notably, Miller’s firm lobbied the Transportation Department in 2025 on behalf of Archer Aviation, a company selected to participate in a new FAA pilot program to test electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) technology – a program championed by Duffy.
Other Alfonso donors include political action committees associated with Lockheed Martin, T-Mobile, and Brightline, a high-speed train service in Florida. Brightline’s PAC donated $2,500 in December, shortly after Duffy pledged to work to improve safety along the company’s rail line following numerous fatalities at crossings.
Alfonso’s Campaign and Fundraising
As of the end of 2025, Alfonso had raised over $305,000 for his campaign. He is utilizing the same fundraising consultant as Duffy and receiving support from a super PAC funded with $1 million from Duffy’s former campaign committee. Alfonso’s campaign website lists priorities such as education, healthcare, and immigration, but does not specifically address transportation issues.
Ethical Concerns and Legal Constraints
Experts, such as Daniel Weiner, director of the Elections and Government Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, emphasize the gap between what is legal and what is ethical in such situations. While the donations themselves may not be illegal, they create the appearance of impropriety and raise concerns about undue influence. The law provides limited constraints on such activities, leaving room for potential conflicts of interest.
The situation surrounding Alfonso’s campaign underscores the challenges of maintaining ethical standards in political fundraising and the potential for special interests to exploit connections to high-ranking officials.