As Trump slashes federal spending, Collins' promise to deliver for Maine is tested
On May 27, U.S. Sen. Susan Collins visited with first responders in Clinton, Maine and reviewed plans for an upgraded facility built with the help of $2 million secured in Congressionally Directed Spending. (Photo via Sen. Susan Collins/ Facebook)
Editor's Note: This story is part of a series about U.S. Sen. Susan Collins' role during the second Trump presidency.
As Republican U.S. Sen. Susan Collins approaches three decades in Congress, the self-described moderate's balancing act has meant she's angered both the left and right. However, even Mainers otherwise critical of Collins commend her ability to secure federal funding for Maine.
'I think her big goal has been what it always has been and that's delivering economically for the state,' said Jim Melcher, a professor of political science at University of Maine Farmington. 'I think [that] really interests her a lot more than being an ideological vote, honestly, for anybody.'
Though, the bounds of that unifier are now being tested by the Trump administration.
Since President Donald Trump threatened to withhold federal funding unless Maine complies with his executive order banning transgender girls from playing girls' sports, the state has been the subject of several probes and funding cuts that have been widely interpreted as retaliatory.
Some Mainers say these terminations underscore why Maine needs Collins, one of Congress' most senior members and top appropriators. Others argue the executive's actions reveal a crack in Collins' power.
When asked whether she believes she can still ensure Maine receives both the funding it's owed and continued appropriations for new initiatives, Collins did not hesitate to say, 'I do.'
Both Republican leaders of the Maine Legislature, Sen. Trey Stewart of Aroostook County and Rep. Billy Bob Faulkingham of Winter Harbor, said, without a doubt, that Collins should not face a primary challenger. Why? Federal funding.
'I think it's absolutely insane to vote out Susan Collins, who brings so much money into the state of Maine,' Faulkingham said.
In fiscal year 2022, Congress reinstated earmarks, formally referred to as Congressionally Directed Spending in the Senate, where individual members have the ability to request funds for specific projects in their home states. Collins has secured more than $1 billion for Maine using this method since.
Collins secured more than $200 million for 105 projects in fiscal year 2022, more than $308 million for 108 projects in fiscal year 2023, and more than $577 million for 231 projects in fiscal year 2024. Her 2024 total was the most secured by any senator that year.
Throughout the years, these have gone toward initiatives related to infrastructure, medical services and affordable housing, among others.
The University of Maine System received $125.45 million from Congressionally Directed Spending secured by Collins between fiscal year 2022 and 2024, according to Chief External and Governmental Affairs Officer Samantha Warren, who called the funding 'transformational.'
Though, Warren added, these earmarks don't reflect all of the funding that Collins has helped funnel to the system, both since the earmark process was restored and before, noting Collins' longtime championing of investments for Maine's public universities including through need-based federal Pell grants and TRIO programs.
Another key funding source outside the earmark process is defense spending, which Collins has helped secure for Maine-based contractors such as Bath Iron Works and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
'Do you think we're going to be building ships at Bath Iron Works if we have a freshman legislator in the Senate? No, I don't think so,' Faulkingham said.
Do you think we're going to be building ships at Bath Iron Works if we have a freshman legislator in the Senate? No, I don't think so.
– Maine House Minority Leader Billy Bob Faulkingham (R-Winter Harbor)
When asked whether the General Dynamics-owned contractor has any concerns about Collins being able to continue to deliver in light of other congressionally appropriated funds being rescinded, David Hench, communications principal for BIW, pointed to her track record.
'Senator Collins' leadership as a member and now chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee has been invaluable in not only providing resources for our national defense, but in helping to address the transportation, housing and childcare needs of our state and workforce,' Hench said.
When asked the same, Kate Dufour, director of advocacy and communications for the Maine Municipal Association, a nonprofit state municipal league, described a similar working relationship between its members and the senator.
'Collins is a strong proponent of municipal government and has done much during her career to ensure that Maine has access to federal revenues, which reduce the burdens placed on the property taxpayers,' Dufour said.
Several other major benefactors of Collins' earmarks declined to comment on her performance as a top appropriator, including Jackson Laboratory and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, or did not respond to requests for comment, including Maine Medical Center.
When asked about her record of delivering for the state, Collins also pointed to her ability to work with both parties to advance legislation that aids many Mainers, and Americans more broadly. For example, she pointed to her co-authoring of the Social Security Fairness Act, signed into law earlier this year under former President Joe Biden, which she said she spent more than two decades working toward. The Act restored full benefits for millions of public sector workers.
The funding process has been upended during Trump's second term, challenging Collins' otherwise steadily growing appropriations power.
The continuing resolution from GOP leadership this winter cut earmarks for community projects. Collins had secured nearly $361 million in earmarks this year before they were removed from the resolution, which she said she ultimately supported to avoid a government shutdown.
While it appears earmarks will return in bills this year to fund projects for fiscal year 2026, Mark Brewer, chair of the political science at the University of Maine, said he doesn't think anyone can actually say whether that will consistently be the case moving forward.
'Really, a lot of the things that we thought for years and years that had been norms for how things are done in Washington are not at the moment,' Brewer said.
How the White House implemented that stopgap bill demonstrated another breakdown of normal procedure, defying precedent in vetoing certain emergency spending allocations made by Congress. Collins warned the Trump administration in a letter then that the move could strain its working relationship with the Appropriations Committee.
State Sen. Rick Bennett of Oxford, a moderate Republican who has crossed paths with Collins when she previously held state-level positions and on campaign trails, said the senior senator has long focused on being institutionally responsible, an objective he also shares.
On the state level, Bennett has argued the Legislature has ceded too much power to the governor and on the national level that Congress has ceded too much to the president. Calling Congress 'barely functional on a good day,' Bennett said of Collins, 'I think it's difficult for her to find a normal process that is inclusive in this chaos.'
When asked whether Collins is charting the most effective path amid that chaos, Bennett said, 'I think we're going to find out. I don't have any advice for her. I think you'd have to be sitting in her seat in order to see what avenues she has.'
Collins has touted her behind-the-scenes conversations with officials as the most effective means to restore funding so far. Maine has been subject to both the Trump administration's across-the-board slashes as well as targeted terminations.
For example, in late February, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration notified the University of Maine that it was immediately discontinuing funding for the $4.5 million Maine Sea Grant, which has helped finance statewide research, strengthen coastal communities and support thousands of jobs over more than five decades.
While one of 34 grants across coastal and Great Lakes states throughout the country, Maine's grant was the only one terminated.
The funding cut came about a week after Trump threatened to withhold federal funding unless Maine complied with his executive order banning transgender girls from playing girls' sports. Since then, the state has been the subject of several probes and funding cuts.
On March 4, independent U.S. Sen. Angus King and Democratic U.S. Rep. Chellie Pingree of Maine sent a letter to Vice Admiral Nancy Hann demanding she immediately reverse the decision. But when Hann announced on March 5 that the grant would be renegotiated, she credited conversations with Collins and her staff. The University of Maine also credited the renegotiation decision to Collins.
'We are deeply appreciative of Senator Collins' leadership and relentless advocacy on behalf of Maine Sea Grant and the hard-working Mainers it has long served,' UMaine President Joan Ferrini-Mundy said in a statement.
Collins lost Saco resident Sandy Katz's support on issues of principle, and while not enough to gain her vote, Katz said, 'The funding is the one thing she does well.'
Values and funding, however, are becoming increasingly entwined, as exemplified by Trump's attempt to force compliance with his executive order through cuts.
On principle, Collins is against transgender athletes playing in women's sports, but when it comes to funding, she criticized the president's attempts to rescind federal dollars for Maine schools.
Trying to find her balance between the two has also been challenged with her votes on Trump's Cabinet picks. She voted for the vast majority of nominees, confirming 20 and voting against two: Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Kash Patel.
Regarding Hegseth, Collins said, 'I think his difficulty in managing the department effectively has shown that my judgment was correct on that.' Since his confirmation, Hegseth has been involved in a spate of security scandals over his use of the open-source, encrypted messaging app Signal.
Regarding Patel, Collins said, 'I felt particularly at this time, but at any time, we need an apolitical FBI director and I did not think that Kash Patel was based on his writings.' Patel has authored children's books and been involved with projects that promote pro-Trump conspiracy theories.
Concerning the Cabinet picks Collins supported, one confirmation in particular stuck out to political scientist and writer Amy Fried: Director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget Russell Vought.
Vought, an architect of Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation's blueprint to overhaul the federal government, has said he doesn't believe Congress has the final say on federal spending.
When asked whether he would comply with the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which clarifies that presidents don't have the legal authority to ignore Congress on federal spending, Vought responded, 'No, I don't believe it's constitutional. The president ran on that view. That's his view, and I agree.'
Collins told Maine Morning Star she gives deference to presidential Cabinet picks regardless of party.
'Despite my disagreements with [Vought], which are pretty profound when it comes to the Impoundment Act, he is clearly well qualified for the position,' Collins said. 'He previously served as both deputy director of OMB and as director of OMB. So when I'm evaluating Cabinet nominees, I, in general, base my decision on whether or not the person is qualified for the job, not on whether I agree with all of their positions.'
Fried argued Collins' vote for Vought undermines her own power.
'Her big claim was 'I will be able to help the state of Maine because someday I'm going to be chair of the Appropriations Committee,'' Fried said. 'Well, if the Appropriations Committee isn't deciding what money goes where, then that just renders that whole thing null and void.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Forbes
29 minutes ago
- Forbes
What To Know About The IRS's $4 Billion Tax Assessment On Yum! Brands
KFC Taco Bell (Photo by Artur Widak/NurPhoto via Getty Images) The IRS has assessed $4 billion in taxes, penalties, and interest on Yum! Brands. The issue stems from a tax-deferred reorganization in 2014. Yum! Brands is now suing to prevent the IRS from collecting these funds. M&A is often among the most complicated tax issues large corporations face, which can often lead to uncertainty and scrutiny from the IRS. In this article, I discuss the Yum! Brand corporation, what happened in 2014, and why they are facing such a steep tax penalty now over a decade later. Yum! Brands is the parent company of KFC, Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, and Habit Burger & Grill. As noted by The Washington Post, this corporation spun off from PepsiCo in 1997 to become among the largest set of restaurant chains in the United States and the world. While it currently features those three staples, the corporation has also previously held other chains, such as A&W and Long John Silvers. Yum! Brands has been known to be innovative by having combination restaurants. In these situations, customers can order from a KFC or Taco Bell (or both) at the same location. What makes Yum! Brands particularly impactful is their international appeal. As stated on the Yum! Brands website, the brands total over 61,000 locations and can be seen in 155 countries. According to CNN, KFC has blossomed to become an international staple in countries like Japan, where people often have KFC as their Christmas dinner. Yum! Brands is also no stranger to tax-related news. In early 2025, the company announced a different restructuring. While the company is famously headquartered in Louisville, Kentucky (hence, Kentucky Fried Chicken), Fortune reported that it will be relocating to Plano, TX, due to, among other things, taxes. Kentucky is a state that levies a corporate income tax (5% in 2025). Meanwhile, Texas famously has a 0% tax rate on corporate profits. Individual income tax is also not levied in Texas. Newsweek suggests that Texas has become a bit of a tax haven for new corporate headquarters such as Tesla, Toyota, Charles Schwab, Chevron, and now Yum! Brands. Prior to 2014, Yum! Brands was made up of separate legal entities based on brand and region. For example, there were separate legal entities for KFC Asia and KFC Europe. According to court filings, On November 30, 2013, Yum! Brands publicly announced a corporate reorganization. In this reorganization, the company would no longer be broken out into segments based on geography. Instead, it would focus its organization based on brands (i.e., KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut). It would also have separate divisions for China and India. The goal of this reorganization was to drive growth. To help facilitate the reorganization, the new subsidiaries issued stock in exchange for stock in the previous subsidiary. This stock for stock reorganization often falls under the Internal Revenue Code Section 368(a)(1)(B), which allows for the acquisition of a corporation solely in exchange for all or part of its voting stock. As long as all of the conditions are met, the Yum! Brand legal entities can exchange the stock without recognizing a gain on the appreciated value of the stock. The conditions for this type of reorganization are as follows: Reorganizations under Section 368 are valuable for a company like Yum! Brands because it wishes to restructure the company's organization to enhance future profits. In a normal transaction where Yum! Brands were selling its stock to another company, Yum! Brands would have a gain (or loss) on the appreciated (depreciated) value of the stock. However, Section 368 allows companies to meet certain conditions to defer the gain to a future period. Importantly, companies still have to recognize a gain on the stock's appreciated value, but this gain will not typically happen until the company ultimately disposes of it. In this case, Yum! Brands thought that the conditions under Section 368(a)(1)(B) were met, which would defer the gain, allowing the reorganization to make more sense from a financial perspective. In Yum! Brand's 2024 10-K financial statements, the company notes the following: As reported by Bloomberg Tax, this disagreement comprises over $4 billion dollars in damages: the $2.1 billion in taxes that the IRS believes Yum! Brands should have paid during their reorganization in 2014, $418 million in underpayment penalties and over $1.5 billion in interest on the money that has not yet been paid to the taxing authority. $4 billion is a large assessment for any firm. However, to put it into context, Yum! Brands in 2024 had a pre-tax income of $1.9 billion and paid income taxes of $414 million on that income. Thus, a tax bill of over $4 billion is astronomical for even a company of this size. NRN reports that the disagreement stems from Yum! Brands believe to have met all of the requirements under Section 368 for the reorganization to be tax-deferred, whereas the taxing authority believes that these matters were not all addressed and initiates billions of dollars of income by way of a sale of appreciated value of stock. NRN also reports that Yum! Brands has taken this matter to court and appeals court but was unsuccessful. In turn, Law360 reports that Yum! Brands have taken the IRS to court to sue them over the collections of this $4 billion. While the matter is still uncertain, many in the M&A tax space continue to watch this saga unfold since it represents a significant assessment being levied against some of the U.S.'s most recognizable restaurant brands.


Forbes
32 minutes ago
- Forbes
The AI Paradox: When More AI Means Less Impact
Young business man with his face passing through the screen of a laptop on binary code background AI is in the news every day. On the one hand, this highlights the vertiginous speed at which the field is developing. On the other, it creates a sense saturation and angst that makes business organizations either drop the subject altogether or go at it full throttle without much discernment. Both approaches will lead to major misses in the inevitable AI-fication of business. In this article, I'll explore what happens when a business goes down the AI rabbit hole without a clear business objective and a solid grasp of the available alternatives. If you have attended any AI conference lately, chances are that, by the end, you thought your business was dangerously behind. Many of these events, even if not on purpose, can leave you with the feeling that you need to deploy AI everywhere and automate everything to catch up. If you've succumbed to this temptation, you most likely found out that is not the right move. Two years into the generative AI revolution, a counterintuitive truth is emerging from boardrooms to factory floors. Companies pursuing 100% AI automation are often seeing diminished returns, while those treating AI as one element in a broader, human-centered workflow are capturing both cost savings and competitive advantages. The obvious truth is already revealing itself: AI is just one more technology at our disposal, and just like every other new technology, everyone is trying to gain first-move advantage, which inevitably creates chaos. Those who see through and beyond said chaos are building the foundations of a successful AI-assisted business. The numbers tell a story that contradicts the automation evangelists. Three in four workers say AI tools have decreased their productivity and added to their workload, according to a recent UpWork survey of 2,500 respondents across four countries. Workers report spending more time reviewing AI-generated content and learning tool complexities than the time these tools supposedly save. Even more revealing: while 85% of company leaders are pushing workers to use AI, nearly half of employees using AI admitted they have no idea how to achieve the productivity gains their employers expect. This disconnect isn't just corporate misalignment—it's a fundamental misunderstanding of how AI creates value. The companies winning the AI game aren't those deploying the most algorithms. They're the ones who understand that intelligent automation shouldn't rely on AI alone. Instead, successful organizations are orchestrating AI within broader process frameworks where human expertise guides strategic decisions while AI handles specific, well-defined tasks. A good AI strategy always revolves around domain experts, not the other way around. Consider how The New York Times approached AI integration. Rather than replacing journalists with AI, the newspaper introduced AI tools for editing copy, summarizing information, and generating promotional content, while maintaining strict guidelines that AI cannot draft full articles or significantly alter journalism. This measured approach preserves editorial integrity while amplifying human capabilities. AI should be integrated strategically and operationally into entire processes, not deployed as isolated solutions to be indiscriminately exploited hoping for magic. Research shows that 60% of business and IT leaders use over 26 systems in their automation efforts, and 42% cite lack of integration as a major digital transformation hurdle. The most effective AI implementations focus on task-specific applications rather than general automation. Task-specific models offer highly specialized solutions for targeted problems, making them more efficient and cost-effective than general-purpose alternatives. Harvard Business School research involving 750 Boston Consulting Group consultants revealed this precision matters enormously. While consultants using AI completed certain tasks 40% faster with higher quality, they were 19 percentage points less likely to produce correct answers on complex tasks requiring nuanced judgment. This 'jagged technological frontier' demands that organizations implement methodical test-and-learn approaches rather than wholesale AI adoption. Harvard Business Review research confirms that AI notoriously fails at capturing intangible human factors essential for real-world decision-making—ethical considerations, moral judgments, and contextual nuances that guide business success. The companies thriving in 2025 aren't choosing between humans and machines. They're building hybrid systems where AI automation is balanced with human interaction to maintain stakeholder trust and capture value that neither could achieve alone. The mantra, 'AI will replace your job,' seems to consistently reveal a timeless truth: everything that should be automated will be automated, not everything than can be automated will. The Path Forward The AI paradox isn't a failure of technology—it's a lesson in implementation strategy. Organizations that resist the allure of complete automation and instead focus on thoughtful integration, task-specific deployment, and human-AI collaboration aren't just avoiding the productivity trap. They're building sustainable competitive advantages that compound over time. The question isn't whether your organization should use AI. It's whether you'll fall into the 'more AI' trap or master the art of 'smarter AI'—where less automation actually delivers more impact.


Washington Post
32 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Points of Light, founded by the Bush family, aims to double American volunteerism by 2035
NEW ORLEANS — The Bush family's nonprofit Points of Light will lead an effort to double the number of people who volunteer with U.S. charitable organizations from 75 million annually to 150 million in 10 years. The ambitious goal, announced in New Orleans at the foundation's annual conference, which concluded Friday, would represent a major change in the way Americans spend their time and interact with nonprofits. It aspires to mobilize people to volunteer with nonprofits in the U.S. at a scale that only federal programs like AmeriCorps have in the past. It also coincides with deep federal funding cuts that threaten the financial stability of many nonprofits and with an effort to gut AmeriCorps programs, which sent 200,000 volunteers all over the country. A judge on Wednesday paused those cuts in some states , which had sued the Trump administration. Jennifer Sirangelo, president and CEO of Points of Light, said that while the campaign has been in development well before the federal cuts, the nonprofit's board members recently met and decided to move forward. 'What our board said was, 'We have to do it now. We have to put the stake in the ground now. It's more important than it was before the disruption of AmeriCorps,'' she said in an interview with The Associated Press. She said the nonprofit aims to raise and spend $100 million over the next three years to support the goal. Points of Light, which is based in Atlanta, was founded by President George H.W. Bush to champion his vision of volunteerism. It has carried on his tradition of giving out a daily award to a volunteer around the country, built a global network of volunteer organizations and cultivated corporate volunteer programs. Speaking Wednesday in New Orleans, Points of Light's board chair Neil Bush told the organization's annual conference that the capacity volunteers add to nonprofits will have a huge impact on communities. 'Our mission is to make volunteering and service easier, more impactful, more sustained,' Bush said. 'Because, let's be honest, the problems in our communities aren't going to fix themselves.' According to data from the U.S. Census Bureau and AmeriCorps, the rate of participation has plateaued since 2002 , with a noticeable dip during the pandemic . Susan M. Chambré, professor emerita at Baruch College who studied volunteering for decades , said Points of Light's goal of doubling the number of volunteers was admirable but unrealistic, given that volunteer rates have not varied significantly over time. But she said more research is needed into what motivates volunteers, which would give insight into how to recruit people. She also said volunteering has become more transactional over time, directed by staff as opposed to organized by volunteers themselves. In making its case for increasing volunteer participation in a recent report , Points of Light drew on research from nonprofits like Independent Sector, the National Alliance for Volunteer Engagement and the Do Good Institute at the University of Maryland. Sirangelo said they want to better measure the impact volunteers make, not just the hours they put in, for example. They also see a major role for technology to better connect potential volunteers to opportunities, though they acknowledge that many have tried to do that through apps and online platforms . Reaching young people will also be a major part of accomplishing this increase in volunteer participation. Sirangelo said she's observed that many young people who do want to participate are founding their own nonprofits rather than joining an existing one. 'We're not welcoming them to our institutions, so they have to go found something,' she said. 'That dynamic has to change.' As the board was considering this new goal, they reached out for advice to Alex Edgar, who is now the youth engagement manager at Made By Us. They ultimately invited him to join the board as a full voting member and agreed to bring on a second young person as well. 'I think for volunteering and the incredible work that Points of Light is leading to really have a deeper connection with my generation, it needs to be done in a way that isn't just talking to or at young people, but really co-created across generations,' said Edgar, who is 21. Karmit Bulman, who has researched and supported volunteer engagement for many years, said she was very pleased to see Points of Light make this commitment. 'They are probably the most well known volunteerism organization in the country and I really appreciate their leadership,' said Bulman, who is currently the executive director of East Side Learning Center, a nonprofit in St. Paul. Bulman said there are many people willing to help out in their communities but who are not willing to jump through hoops to volunteer with a nonprofit. 'We also need to recognize that it's a pretty darn stressful time in people's lives right now,' she said. 'There's a lot of uncertainty personally and professionally and financially for a lot of people. So we need to be really, really flexible in how we engage volunteers.' ___ Associated Press coverage of philanthropy and nonprofits receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content. For all of AP's philanthropy coverage, visit .