logo
Donald Trump gave Susan Collins a pass, for now. Will Maine voters?

Donald Trump gave Susan Collins a pass, for now. Will Maine voters?

Yahoo16 hours ago
Jul. 6—As the top Senate appropriator, Sen. Susan Collins was expected to be a key player in negotiations this summer over the sweeping tax and spending bill proposed by President Donald Trump.
But as the final vote drew near on Tuesday, Collins was not the one being pressured by Senate leadership to support Trump's "Big Beautiful Budget." It was her fellow moderate Republican, Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who was put through the meat grinder and ultimately voted in support of the bill, even though she admittedly doesn't like it, after receiving concessions to lessen the impact on her home state.
Critics say that it was all part of the plan, speculating that Senate Majority Leader John Thune — and so far, Trump — gave Collins a free pass, allowing her to vote against a bill that polling suggests is deeply unpopular ahead of the 2026 midterms, when she will face voters. Murkowski, meanwhile, doesn't face reelection until 2029.
Trump is not one to suffer disloyalty lightly. After Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., eviscerated the bill in a floor speech, Trump attacked him online and threatened to primary him. Tillis voted against the bill and announced he would not seek reelection.
Collins is the only congressional Republican from New England and the only Republican senator up for reelection in a state won by Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election. She is widely viewed as one of the few Republicans who can hold a statewide seat in Maine.
Democrats believe Collins is vulnerable and the race is expected to draw hundreds of millions of dollars in outside spending. And national Democrats are trying to recruit Gov. Janet Mills, who strongly opposed the bill and put her concerns in writing to the entire delegation.
Critics say that leadership knew they had the votes to pass the bill without Collins. Had they needed her, Collins would have been the only member of Maine's delegation to support the bill and would have presented a clear contrast for Mills, should she choose to run.
In an interview with the Portland Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram on Wednesday, Collins pushed back against any suggestion that the Senate vote was orchestrated to give her a free pass.
"That is absolutely ludicrous," Collins said, blaming "partisan Democrats" for spreading a "crazy untruth."
"No one knew what her ultimate decision was going to be," Collins said of Murkowski.
Collins held her cards close to her chest before the vote, refusing to say publicly which way she might vote but expressing concern about drastic cuts to Medicaid and food assistance, among other provisions.
Collins won praise from Maine's hospitals for her "no" vote, for speaking out about the impact of Medicaid cuts and for trying to cushion the impact of taking health coverage away from an estimated 40,000 people in Maine. Those provisions in the bill are expected to push hospitals into greater financial distress but, unlike tax cuts that primarily benefit the wealthy, won't take effect until after the 2026 election.
But political observers say Collins may not be able to avoid the blame for any negative consequences, given her party affiliation.
"The problem is, she is part of a team that pushed forward a measure that will be very unpopular," said Dan Shea, political science professor at at Colby College in Waterville. "It's her colleagues, it's her caucus, that pushed through this bill. And there may be a good bit of guilt by association."
COLLINS LACKS TRUMP'S EAR
A recent poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center found that 58% of respondents in Maine didn't want the bill to pass, including 94% of Democrats and 72% of independents. Less than a third wanted it to pass, which was similar with most other national polls. The online survey of 846 people was conducted from June 19-23 and has a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points.
"She's independent, but she's also in lockstep with her Republican colleagues in a lot of moves, including leadership," Shea said. "Her first vote if she's reelected will be for a Republican majority leader, probably John Thune. This is the same leadership that pushed through this measure."
Collins wasn't a vociferous outspoken critic of the bill, as was independent Sen. Angus King, though she expressed concerns about the Medicaid cuts. She declined repeated interviews with the Press Herald leading up the bill's passage, saying she wanted to see the final text first, which was not available until the last minute.
She proposed an amendment that would have allowed tax cuts for people making more than $25 million to expire, while doubling an emergency fund for rural hospitals to $50 million, which is still believed to be far short of what will be needed to maintain services and prevent closures. Her amendment was voted down, but the additional funding was included in the final bill, without the tax increase.
The Maine Hospital Association heaped praise on Collins in a written statement Wednesday.
"We want to particularly thank Senator Collins for her efforts on behalf of Maine hospitals," the association said in a written statement. "It is very difficult to take a stance contrary to one's party caucus. However, as she has done many times, when Senator Collins feels Maine will be hurt, she fights for Maine. And we can not thank her enough. The lone mitigation measure for hospitals in the reconciliation package, the relief fund, was the direct result of Senator Collins' efforts."
But Mark Brewer, chair of political science at the University of Maine in Orono, said Collins may have a hard time convincing voters that, as appropriations chair and a senior Republican senator with power and influence in the chamber, she did not play a pivotal role in shaping the bill.
"You would think as head of the Senate Appropriations Committee — and also a key swing vote — she would have been in a powerful position to shape this kind of legislation," Brewer said. "But one thing we have learned about Trump so far in his second term is that those old positions of power may not matter as much as they used to."
Only those who are close to Trump can influence his thinking, Brewer said. "In that sense, Collins didn't have a whole lot of influence in shaping this bill. Certainly not what you would expect from a Senate appropriations chair in previous administrations, for sure," he said.
Collins is not in Trump's inner circle, though she did travel to Mar-a-Lago in February to discuss the budget. She has not supported any of his three campaigns for president and voted to convict him after the Jan. 6, 2021, riots at the Capitol.
Trump publicly criticized Collins after The New York Times reported in 2022 that she and Sen. Mitch McConnell were recruiting "anti-Trump candidates." Trump called Collins "absolutely atrocious" and said he could have ousted her from her Senate seat.
A month later, Trump called Collins "wacky" for leading efforts to make it harder for members of Congress to challenge election results and make it clear that the vice president only has a ceremonial role in counting electoral votes. The changes were made after Trump pressured former Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the 2020 election results.
But she has also provided support at key moments, casting the deciding vote in Trump's first term to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court, which later overturned nationwide abortion protections under Roe v. Wade. And she has supported some of his more controversial cabinet appointments in his second term, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Tulsi Gabbard and Russell Vought.
Collins told the Press Herald on Wednesday that she informed the White House "weeks ago" that the bill would need to undergo significant changes to win her support. Even then, Collins was not at the center of the action as the vote drew near.
In addition to Murkowski, Thune reportedly held late talks with Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who ultimately voted against the bill because it included a $5 trillion increase in the national debt ceiling. It's unclear if Collins had similar meetings with the majority leader in the final hours.
OPPONENTS POUNCE
Although she voted against the bill, opponents are working overtime to tie her to Trump and the bill's passage, primarily by highlighting her procedural vote last weekend to advance the bill for a final debate and vote.
Jordan Wood, a Bristol Democrat who is mounting the most aggressive challenge to Collins, said Maine's senior senator should have used the procedural vote to try to stop the bill, so lawmakers could start over. He described her as the decisive vote to advance the bill, even though her "no" vote on the motion would only have led to a 50-50 tie and Vice President JD Vance was prepared to cast a deciding vote in favor.
"That (procedural vote) was her opportunity to organize an opposition to make sure that, given how devastating this bill will be for our state, she could stand up and stop it if she wanted to and if she had the courage to and she didn't," Wood said. "People in Maine have seen this before where she is given permission because she's not the decisive vote to vote against it. That's what we saw again."
A famous Maine critic of Collins had a similar take.
"As always, Susan Collins counted votes and decided she could vote no and the bill would still pass, thus saving her golden seat in the Senate," author Stephen King said in a social media post. "She and Murkowski seem to have a pact — whose turn is it to vote no this time?"
Phillip Rench, an engineer from Waterboro who is running as an independent, also criticized Collins, questioning her influence.
"Even though she voted against this bill, she is still responsible for it," Rench said in a written statement. "She failed to secure adequate funding for rural hospitals and now Mainers on Medicaid will face uncertainty and loss of coverage. To make matters worse, 3-4 Trillion Dollars will be added to the already 37 Trillion National Debt, of which our children will be paying interest on for the rest of their lives."
WHAT REPUBLICANS THINK
It's unclear how her vote will play with Republican voters, and more importantly Trump supporters, who make up an increasingly large percentage of Republicans. Collins has been greeted with mixed reactions at state party conventions, which have increasingly focused on supporting Trump.
Carmen Calabrese, a Kennebunkport resident who has announced that he's challenging Collins for the Republican nomination, is running as a steadfast Trump supporter and urged passage of Trump's budget bill, saying it's "a winner for Maine" and urging Collins to "show some backbone."
Calabrese blasted Collins in a news release after she voted against the bill.
"What's the sense in sending a Republican Collins to DC when she votes with the Democrats?" Calabrese said in a written statement. "She has sold us out once again to the liberal media. She cares more about getting a headline than saving tipped workers money or giving relief to seniors. This obstructionist has to go."
Despite their history and his attacks on other Republican opponents, Trump has not taken to social media to criticize Collins.
Some say that speaks volumes, especially since Trump immediately threatened to primary Sen. Thom Tillis, R-North Carolina, after he eviscerated the bill in a floor speech. Tillis voted against the bill and announced that he would not seek reelection.
As of late last week, Trump had not posted anything about Collins.
That could be a reflection of Trump listening to his advisers and considering the midterms. Generally, the party that controls the White House loses seats in Congress during a midterm election, and that could be especially true with Trump, whose supporters generally turn out for him but not others.
"(Trump) knew Tillis was vulnerable," Brewer said. "Maybe his advisers thought, 'We could find another Republican that can run competitively in North Carolina, but maybe we can't find another Republican who can do what Susan Collins can do in Maine.'"
Copy the Story Link
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

This Fast-Casual Chinese Chain Is Beating Local Spots At Their Own Game
This Fast-Casual Chinese Chain Is Beating Local Spots At Their Own Game

Yahoo

time33 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

This Fast-Casual Chinese Chain Is Beating Local Spots At Their Own Game

Let's face it: America's very fond of chain dining. Whether it's one of the best regional fast food chains or one of the ubiquitous giants, corporate eating covers every context. And both the cuisine and locations of such operations are rapidly evolving: It's not just about burgers or fried chicken anymore. And now, Pei Wei is once again changing the game. Since starting some 25 years ago in Arizona, the chain operates over a hundred locations all across the country. During their first decade of preparation, several factors set them apart. They were among the earliest corporate adopters of gluten-free and allergy sensitive dining. And the interior is sleek, but still casual, with a convenient counter service model that saves costs. Last -- but certainly not least -- for easy-going Pan-Asian fare, the eclectic menu hits the spot: Think classics like orange chicken, Mongolian beef, as well Poke bowls, Thai-influenced curries, and more. Throw in affordable pricing, and such a combination of factors cemented their enduring growth -- a valued evidenced by their (and P.F. Chang's) acquisition for over a billion dollars in 2012. Such a scale cements Pei Wei as the second biggest player in Asian food. The more fast-food like Panda Express menu is the only company that more commercially successful. However, for many Americans, Pei Wei even beats out local, hole-in-wall options. Read more: Chain Restaurants That Serve The Highest And Lowest Quality Steak Pei Wei may have introduced you to classics like orange chicken, but the chain didn't invent Chinese-American cuisine. Instead, many items off their menu are adapted versions of fare that traces roots to 19th century California. It's here that Cantonese-run eateries -- especially densely cluttered in the Bay Area -- first created tasty and affordable dishes like chop suey. And the creation of orange chicken is accredited to Panda Express in 1987. So while Pei Wei does offer a few signature dishes like their protein bowls and salads, they mainly stick to tried and true Asian-American classics. Pei Wei broke into such a formula by way of P.F. Chang's, their more upscale counterpart chain which opened in 1993 (and now boasts a great happy hour). An innovator in specifically wok-driven dishes sold to American audiences, P.F. Chang's has enjoyed popularity since the 1990s, with their snazzy surroundings yet comforting fare. The parent company launched Pei Wei in 2000 to deliver simpler Asian-American classics in a more casual environment, with less overhead. The move proved hugely commercially successful, leading to the chain that still thrives today. Read the original article on Chowhound.

Planned Parenthood sues Trump admin, saying it is targeted by provision in megabill

time40 minutes ago

Planned Parenthood sues Trump admin, saying it is targeted by provision in megabill

A federal judge in Massachusetts granted a temporary restraining order against a provision in President Donald Trump's recently passed tax and policy megabill that would deny Planned Parenthood and its member organizations Medicaid funding for one year for non-abortion health services. Planned Parenthood, the largest reproductive health provider in the United States, and two of its member organizations had filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration earlier Monday over the provision, which the groups said was meant to target Planned Parenthood and its member organizations over abortion access. While the Hyde Amendment already prohibits the use of federal funding for abortions, the provision would prevent providers that offer abortion services and that received over $800,000 or more in federal Medicaid funding in 2023 from receiving Medicaid funding for other kinds of care for one year. Judge Indira Talwani, who was nominated by former President Barack Obama, wrote in the temporary restraining order that "Defendants, their agents, employees, appointees, successors, and anyone acting in concert or participation with Defendants shall take all steps necessary to ensure that Medicaid funding continues to be disbursed in the customary manner and timeframes to Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its members; Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts; and Planned Parenthood Association of Utah." The order is set to remain in effect for 14 days, and a hearing has been set for July 21. Planned Parenthood, in a statement on social media on Monday night, wrote, "We're grateful that the court acted swiftly to block this unconstitutional law attacking Planned Parenthood providers and patients... The fight is just beginning, and we look forward to our day in court!" In its lawsuit, Planned Parenthood wrote that the bill's provision was meant "to categorically prohibit health centers associated with Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid reimbursements… in order to punish them for lawful activity, namely advocating for and providing legal abortion access wholly outside the Medicaid program and without using any federal funds." Mentioning that Planned Parenthood branches serve over a million patients using Medicaid each year, the group wrote, "losing the ability to choose a Planned Parenthood Member health center as their Medicaid provider will be devastating for Medicaid patients across the country." The group also said that Planned Parenthood clinics, services, and staff would likely be eliminated if the clinics can no longer get Medicaid reimbursement. The lawsuit names Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) administrator Mehmet Oz, along with their respective agencies, as plaintiffs. ABC News has reached out to HHS and CMS for comment. Multiple groups that oppose abortion access condemned the lawsuit, calling the bill a win for their cause and framing Planned Parenthood as desperate. "Planned Parenthood's desperation is showing as they run to the courts again to fix a crisis of their own making. Time after time they rely on unelected judges to bail them out of trouble, rather than fix deep systemic problems internally... As Planned Parenthood doubles down on lawfare and abortion politics, they prove exactly why the One Big Beautiful Bill is a historic victory for the people, stopping half a billion dollars in forced taxpayer funding of the corrupt abortion industry for the first time," Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America director of legal affairs Katie Daniel said in a statement.

Jeffrey Epstein died by suicide and there's no ‘client list,' Justice Department says
Jeffrey Epstein died by suicide and there's no ‘client list,' Justice Department says

Yahoo

time40 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Jeffrey Epstein died by suicide and there's no ‘client list,' Justice Department says

After months of touting the impending release of new, blockbuster information on accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, the Justice Department announced in a memo Monday that there is no evidence he kept a 'client list' or was murdered. The Justice Department also does not plan to release any new documents in the matter, it said Monday. The admission reneges on promises from President Donald Trump, who previously spoke about releasing more governmental files on the disgraced financier, as well as go against years of conspiracy theories pushed by the right wing. 'This systematic review revealed no incriminating 'client list,'' the unsigned memo states. 'There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions. We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.' Axios was first to report details of the DOJ and FBI's decision. The department has also released 10 hours of jailhouse security footage that shows no one entered Epstein's jail cell on the day he died by suicide. Right-wing media figures have, for years, suggested that the government is hiding secrets relating to Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges. Some of those individuals breathlessly pushed the theory that Epstein kept a 'client list' as blackmail against powerful figures who he helped commit similar crimes. After being confirmed as attorney general earlier this year, Pam Bondi quickly embraced those theories, saying in a February interview on Fox News that a client list was 'sitting on my desk right now to review.' She continued, 'that's been a directive by President Trump. I'm reviewing that.' Soon after, in conjunction with the White House, the Justice Department released a series of documents related to the Epstein investigation – almost all of which were already available in the public domain. The administration even invited influencers to get a 'scoop' on the documents at the White House, and photos from the day show those influencers walking out of the White House with white binders labeled 'The Epstein Files: Phase 1.' Bondi promised more information would be coming, and FBI agents – many of whom were assigned to work on national security matters – were ordered to work around the clock in a frantic effort to review documents and other evidence for public release. But soon the department stopped mentioning the release, much to the chagrin of supporters who inundated the DOJ and FBI's social media with demands for new information. FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino, both of whom publicly questioned the investigation before being tapped for their roles, even started mentioning in interviews that there was no evidence Epstein was murdered. Bongino in May said the jailhouse video, now posted online, is 'clear as day.' 'Consistent with prior disclosures, this review confirmed that Epstein harmed over one thousand victims,' Monday's memo states. 'Each suffered unique trauma. Sensitive information relating to these victims is intertwined throughout the materials. This includes specific details such as victim names and likenesses, physical descriptions, places of birth, associates, and employment history.' 'One of our highest priorities is combatting child exploitation and bringing justice to victims. Perpetuating unfounded theories about Epstein serves neither of those ends,' it adds. 'To that end, while we have labored to provide the public with maximum information regarding Epstein and ensured examination of any evidence in the government's possession, it is the determination of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation that no further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted.' Reports of the announcement were immediately met with outrage online, most notably from Trump's erstwhile ally Elon Musk, who posted an image of a zeroed-out scoreboard titled 'The Official Jeffrey Epstein Pedophile Arrest Counter.' 'What's the time? Oh look, it's no-one-has-been-arrested-o'clock again,' Musk wrote in the post on X. Six weeks ago, Musk claimed on X that '@realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files,' later posting a video of Trump at a party with Epstein with a raised eyebrow emoji. The since-deleted posts were a part of one of Trump and Musk's feuds regarding Trump's recent tax and domestic policy bill. Other right-wing figures blasted the announcement too. One such activist, Jack Posobiec, wrote on X, referring to Epstein's associate convicted of charges related to Epstein's sex-trafficking, 'If there were no clients, why is Ghislaine Maxwell still in jail?' Another, Robby Starbuck, said of Bondi's previous comments on a client list: 'Was she lying then or is she lying now? We deserve answers.' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Monday stood by the Justice Department's 'exhaustive investigation' of 'all the files related to Epstein's crimes and death.' Pressed on the client list referred to in February's Fox News interview, Leavitt said during a White House press briefing that Bondi was referring to the 'entirety of all of the paperwork' related to Epstein. 'All of the paper in relation to Jeffrey Epstein crimes. That's what the attorney general was referring to. And I'll let her speak for that. But again, when it comes to the FBI and the Department of Justice, they are more than committed to ensuring that bad people are put behind bars,' Leavitt said. DOJ spokesperson Chad Gilmartin also told CNN on Monday that in the Fox News interview, Bondi was referring to all of the paperwork related to the Epstein investigation, such as flight logs, and not to a specific client list. Leavitt said some material was not released because it was 'incredibly graphic and it contained child pornography.' 'This administration wants anyone who has ever committed a crime to be held accountable … and the Trump administration is committed to truth and to transparency,' Leavitt said. 'They committed to an exhaustive investigation,' Leavitt continued, referring to the Justice Department. 'That's what they did, and they provided the results of that. That's transparency.' CNN's Kit Maher and Emma Canan contributed to this report. This story has been updated with additional developments.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store