Latest news with #SusanCollins
Newsweek
4 hours ago
- Business
- Newsweek
Susan Collins' Chances of Losing Maine Senate Election, According to Polls
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Susan Collins' chances of being reelected in Maine are improving, according to latest polling. A new survey shows the Republican Senator's favorability rating has risen compared to previous polls, ahead of the November 2026 midterms. Why It Matters Collins, a moderate who spoke out against Donald Trump during his first term, has represented Maine since 1997. The state is politically split because it is also represented by independent Senator Angus King, and Governor Jane Mills, a Democrat. Former vice president Kamala Harris won the state by seven points in 2024 and former President Joe Biden won it by nine points in 2020. In 2020, when Collins was most recently up for reelection, she beat former Maine House Speaker Sara Gideon, a Democrat, with 51 percent of the vote. This was a smaller margin than when she won her 2014 reelection with a 37-point margin. Sen. Susan Collins, R,Maine, questions witness Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., during a Senate Committee on Appropriations subcommittee hearing to examine proposed budget estimates for fiscal year 2026 for the Department... Sen. Susan Collins, R,Maine, questions witness Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., during a Senate Committee on Appropriations subcommittee hearing to examine proposed budget estimates for fiscal year 2026 for the Department of Health and Human Services, on Capitol Hill, Tuesday, May 20, 2025, in Washington. More AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta If Collins loses her seat, it will prove more difficult for Republicans who currently control the Senate with a 53 to 47-seat majority. What To Know According to a Pan Atlantic Research poll of 840 Maine likely voters, 49 percent of people see Collins favorably, 45 percent unfavorably, making her net favorability +4 percent. The polling was conducted between May 12 and May 26 with a margin of sampling error of +/- 3.5 percent. This is an improvement on previous polling released by the University of New Hampshire (UNH) in April, which showed 71 percent of respondents did not believe Collins should be reelected. That poll also showed only 12 percent of respondents had a favorable view of the Senator, and 58 percent had an unfavorable view. What People Are Saying Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.), who ran the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) during the 2020 cycle told the Hill: "In general, for any senator who's served their state and been out there and talking to the voters and engaging them and working to solve those problems, they're going to be effective with their voters to gain their support." James Melcher, a professor of political science at the University of Maine at Farmington, previously told Newsweek "there's no question" that a run by Collins would make it more difficult for Democrats to flip the seat. "Mainers are ticket splitters to a large degree, and even in a polarized climate, many may vote for her and also vote for a D for governor," he said. "She's also generally run well ahead of top of the ticket Republicans, though last time she lost a lot of D and independent support compared to past runs." Dan Shea, a professor of government at Colby College in Waterville, told Newsweek in March: "It's a blue state that she can win. But the snag is that group is getting smaller and smaller. Swing voters might not be extinct in Maine, but they are on the endangered species list." What Happens Next With over a year to go until the midterms, Collins' popularity and chances of winning her seat are likely to fluctuate depending on her policies and on what other politicians step into the ring in opposition.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
The ‘Medicaid moderates' are the senators to watch on the megabill
The Senate's deficit hawks might be raising the loudest hue and cry over the GOP's 'big, beautiful bill.' But another group of Republicans is poised to have a bigger impact on the final legislative product. Call them the 'Medicaid moderates.' They're actually an ideologically diverse bunch — ranging from conservative Josh Hawley of Missouri to centrist Susan Collins of Maine. Yet they have found rare alignment over concerns about what the House-passed version of the GOP domestic-policy megabill does to the national safety-net health program, and they have the leverage to force significant changes in the Senate. 'I would hope that we would elect not to do anything that would endanger Medicaid benefits as a conference,' Hawley said in an interview. 'I've made that clear to my leadership. I think others share that perspective.' Besides Hawley and Collins, other GOP senators including Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Jerry Moran of Kansas and Jim Justice of West Virginia have also drawn public red lines over health care — and they have some rhetorical backing from President Donald Trump, who has urged congressional Republicans to spare the program as much as possible. Based on early estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, 10.3 million people would lose coverage under Medicaid if the House-passed bill were to become law — many, if not most, in red states. That could spell trouble for Majority Leader John Thune's whip count: He can only lose three GOP senators on the expected party-line vote and still have Vice President JD Vance break a tie. Republicans already have one all-but-guaranteed opponent in Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky so long as they stick to their plan to raise the debt limit as part of the bill. They also view Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson as increasingly likely to oppose the package after spending weeks blasting the bill on fiscal grounds. Meeting either senator's demands could be enormously difficult given the tight fiscal parameters through which House leaders have to squeeze the bill to advance it in their own chamber. That in turn is empowering the senators elsewhere in the GOP conference to make changes — and the Medicaid group is emerging as the key bloc to watch because of its size and its overlapping, relatively workable demands. Heeding those asks won't be easy. Republicans are counting on savings from Medicaid changes to offset hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts, and rolling that back is likely to create political pain elsewhere for Thune & Co., who already want to cut more than the House to assuage a sizable group of spending hawks. At the same time, Speaker Mike Johnson is insisting the Senate make only minor changes to the bill so as to maintain the delicate balance in his own narrowly divided chamber. Thune and Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) have already acknowledged that Medicaid, covering nearly 80 million low-income Americans, will be one of the biggest sticking points as they embark this month on a rewrite of the megabill. They are talking with key members in anticipation of difficult negotiations and being careful not to draw red lines publicly. 'We want to do things that are meaningful in terms of reforming programs, strengthening programs, without affecting beneficiaries,' Thune said, echoing language used by some of the concerned senators. Crapo voiced support in an interview for one pillar of the House bill — broad new work requirements for Medicaid beneficiaries — but rushed to add that he's 'still working with a 53-member caucus to get answers' to how the program can be overhauled: 'I can only speak for myself.' Complicating their task is the fact that some in the group — namely Collins and Murkowski — have a proven history of bucking their party even amid intense public pressure. The pair, in fact, helped tank the GOP's last party-line effort on health care, in 2017. Leaders view them as unlikely to be moved by the type of arm-twisting Republicans are planning to deploy to bring enough of the fiscal hawks on board. And then there's Hawley, who is playing up Trump's own warnings to congressional Republicans about keeping their hands off Medicaid. Hawley and Trump spoke shortly before the House passed its bill, with the senator recounting that the president said 'absolutely categorically, 'Do not touch Medicaid. No Medicaid benefit cuts, none.'' Hawley, like Crapo, has indicated he is comfortable with work requirements, but he is pushing for two major tweaks to the House language: undoing a freeze on provider taxes, which most states use to help finance their share of Medicaid costs, and new co-payment requirements for some beneficiaries that he has been calling a 'sick tax.' The provider tax changes would present an issue with multiple senators, who fear it would exacerbate the bill's impact on state budgets and slash funding that helps keep rural hospitals afloat. Justice, a former governor, called it a 'real issue.' 'They haven't done anything to really cut into the bone except that one thing,' Justice added. 'That's gonna put a big burden on the states.' Moran grabbed the attention of his colleagues when he warned in a pointed April floor speech that making changes to Medicaid would hurt rural hospitals. A "significant portion' of his focus, he said, 'is to make sure the hospitals have the capability and the revenues necessary to provide the services the community needs — Medicaid is a component of that.' Collins, who is up for reelection in 2026, has also left the door open to supporting work requirements, depending on how they are crafted. She has also raised concerns about the provider tax provision, noting that 'rural hospitals in my state and across the country are really teetering.' Murkowski, meanwhile, isn't as concerned about the provider tax, because Alaska is the only state that doesn't use it to help cover its share of Medicaid spending. But she has expressed alarm over the House's approach to work requirements, including a decision to speed up the implementation deadline to appease House hard-liners. She said it would be 'very challenging if not impossible' for her state to implement. As it is, any effort to water down the House's Medicaid language will face steep resistance in other corners of the GOP-controlled Senate, where lawmakers are pushing to amp up spending cuts, not scale them back. Some senators, in fact, want to further tighten the House's work requirements or reduce, not just freeze, the provider tax. 'I'd be damned disappointed if a Republican majority with a Republican president didn't make some reforms,' said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). 'The provider tax is a money laundering machine. … If we don't go after that, we're not doing our jobs.' Ron Johnson and a few others are continuing to push to change the cost split for those Medicaid beneficiaries made eligible under the Affordable Care Act. The federal government now picks up 90 percent of the cost, and House centrists nixed an effort by conservatives to reduce it. One idea under discussion by conservatives is to phase in the change to appease skittish colleagues and state governments, but that is still likely to be a nonstarter for 50 GOP senators. Hawley warned that 'there will be no Senate bill if that is on the table.' Adam Cancryn contributed to this report.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Outrage after Trump administration suspends job training program for low-income youth
The Trump administration's Department of Labor announced on Thursday it would suspend operations of the Job Corps training program, prompting bipartisan criticism. 'The Department should have attempted to fix them but, instead of working with the contractors and helping students, they've just decided to send the students home,' Representative Steve Cohen, Democrat of Tennessee, wrote in a statement. 'The Department of Labor apparently has no plans for an improved product or a new approach. This careless approach will upset the lives of too many ambitious members of a future workforce, and should be condemned.' Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, also said she 'strongly' opposes pausing the program as part of the administration's push to cut spending, calling the Job Corps centers in her state 'important pillars of support for some of our most disadvantaged young adults.' The Labor Department announced the shift on Thursday, saying it 'reflects the Administration's commitment to ensure federal workforce investments deliver meaningful results for both students and taxpayers.' It argued the program, created in 1964 to offer free residential education and job training to low-income teens and young adults, was delivering poor results. 'Job Corps was created to help young adults build a pathway to a better life through education, training, and community,' Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer said in a statement announcing the pause, which will occur by the end of June. 'However, a startling number of serious incident reports and our in-depth fiscal analysis reveal the program is no longer achieving the intended outcomes that students deserve.' The Department said the program ran a $140 million deficit last year. In 2023, according to government data, the program spent over $80,000 per pupil to achieve a 38.6 percent graduation rate. Other critics took issue with the legality of pausing the program, which has served over 2 million people. 'Congress appropriated funding for Job Corps, and the Trump Administration can't just decide to not spend it because they want to make room for tax cuts for billionaires,' Senator Tammy Baldwin, Democrat of Wisconsin, said in a statement to The Hill. The administration has pushed for other cuts at the Labor Department, including seeking to cancel leases held by the Mine Safety and Health Administration, though this week it dropped that effort. The Trump administration's 2026 budget has proposed cutting 4,000 full-time staffers from the department, about a quarter of its current workforce.
The Independent
3 days ago
- Business
- The Independent
Outrage after Trump administration suspends job training program for low-income youth
The Trump administration 's Department of Labor announced on Thursday it would suspend operations of the Job Corps training program, prompting bipartisan criticism. 'The Department should have attempted to fix them but, instead of working with the contractors and helping students, they've just decided to send the students home,' Representative Steve Cohen, Democrat of Tennessee, wrote in a statement. 'The Department of Labor apparently has no plans for an improved product or a new approach. This careless approach will upset the lives of too many ambitious members of a future workforce, and should be condemned.' Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, also said she 'strongly' opposes pausing the program as part of the administration's push to cut spending, calling the Job Corps centers in her state 'important pillars of support for some of our most disadvantaged young adults.' The Labor Department announced the shift on Thursday, saying it 'reflects the Administration's commitment to ensure federal workforce investments deliver meaningful results for both students and taxpayers.' It argued the program, created in 1964 to offer free residential education and job training to low-income teens and young adults, was delivering poor results. 'Job Corps was created to help young adults build a pathway to a better life through education, training, and community,' Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer said in a statement announcing the pause, which will occur by the end of June. 'However, a startling number of serious incident reports and our in-depth fiscal analysis reveal the program is no longer achieving the intended outcomes that students deserve.' The Department said the program ran a $140 million deficit last year. In 2023, according to government data, the program spent over $80,000 per pupil to achieve a 38.6 percent graduation rate. Other critics took issue with the legality of pausing the program, which has served over 2 million people. 'Congress appropriated funding for Job Corps, and the Trump Administration can't just decide to not spend it because they want to make room for tax cuts for billionaires,' Senator Tammy Baldwin, Democrat of Wisconsin, said in a statement to The Hill. The administration has pushed for other cuts at the Labor Department, including seeking to cancel leases held by the Mine Safety and Health Administration, though this week it dropped that effort. The Trump administration's 2026 budget has proposed cutting 4,000 full-time staffers from the department, about a quarter of its current workforce.
CBS News
5 days ago
- Business
- CBS News
Medicaid cost-cutting measures passed by House to be scrutinized by GOP senators as they take up Trump agenda
Washington — The Senate will soon be considering the massive legislation containing President Trump's second-term agenda after House Republicans passed it last week, following days of negotiations over changes to Medicaid, among other key issues. Senate Republicans will put their "imprint" on the bill, as Senate Majority Leader John Thune put it, and some pointed to changes to Medicaid as a possible red line for those who are undecided. As recently as Memorial Day weekend, at least one, Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, said she's still going over the House bill: "I'm still looking at it because it kept changing up until literally the very minute it passed." Medicaid is the popular entitlement program that provides government-sponsored health care for low-income Americans and people with disabilities. The federal government shares the costs of the program with states, shouldering a minimum of 50% of the costs for richer states, while contributing more for the poorest. In 2025, it paid 77% of the Medicaid costs for Mississippi. Here's what to know about the changes to Medicaid in the House measure and the reaction so far by some GOP senators who have said they're concerned about the Medicaid provisions: Potential Republican opposition in the Senate Some of the House's Medicaid provisions may face resistance in the Senate. And with a narrow majority, Senate Republicans can only afford to lose three of their members if everyone votes. Collins and Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who have been willing to break with their party on certain issues, say changes to Medicaid must not hurt their states. And the two senators, along with Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, supported an amendment to the budget resolution that would have removed the language instructing the committee that oversees Medicaid from finding $880 billion in cuts. That amendment failed. In a New York Times OpEd earlier this month, Hawley called "slashing health insurance for the working poor" both "morally wrong and politically suicidal." And although he's outlined his support for the legislation's work requirements, he's drawn a red line on any Medicaid benefit cuts. Expanding Medicaid work requirements The legislation includes new work requirements that would apply to childless Medicaid recipients without disabilities between the ages of 19 and 64. A last-minute amendment to the bill would speed up the implementation of the work requirements from Jan. 1, 2029, to no later than Dec. 31, 2026 — a change sought by hardliners. There are exemptions for those who are caregivers for dependent children or who are pregnant, among others. Hawley likes the idea of work requirements and told the Washington Examiner in February that it's "probably something that unites Republicans." Collins recently also said she supports some work requirements, and Murkowski, in a conversation with the nonprofit Foraker Group, suggested that she could support them — as long as its implementation is overseen by states, which could have "some level of flexibility" in applying the requirement. In a state like Alaska, Murkowski said, "It's going to be a little bit different if you're out in a rural area where you don't have the opportunity for jobs unless you move into the city, or if you are the full-time caregiver for someone in your family." Cutting down on "waste, fraud and abuse" Republicans argue that more frequent eligibility checks on Medicaid recipients will cut down significantly on "waste, fraud and abuse." The bill requires states to check at least every six months whether adults covered under the Medicaid expansion are still eligible. States would also be required to take steps to obtain enrollees' updated contact information and check a Social Security Administration database more frequently to determine whether any enrolled individuals have died. GOP senators who may be undecided on the bill have not yet indicated whether they object to this proposal. Penalizing states that provide health benefits to undocumented migrants The bill also includes a provision that would reduce federal funds to states that provide state-funded health care to undocumented immigrants. Though people who are in the U.S. illegally are not eligible to receive Medicaid coverage, 14 states and Washington, D.C., have expanded their state-funded health coverage to include children regardless of their immigration status, according to KFF, while seven states and D.C. cover some adults. Under the Affordable Care Act, 40 states and D.C. have expanded Medicaid, enabling them to receive federal funding for 90% of the costs for low-income people receiving health care coverage under the expansion. The House bill would reduce the match rate to 80% for states providing health care to undocumented immigrants. Banning Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming care The House bill also prohibits federal Medicaid funding from covering gender transition services for children and adults, including surgeries, hormone therapy and puberty blockers. The bill initially blocked gender-affirming care for minors but was updated to include adults before its passage in the House. Freezing provider taxes States can boost federal Medicaid contributions to their states through what's known as a provider tax, often levying taxes on health care providers, which raises the overall cost of a service and therefore increases the portion paid by the state. For instance, if the cost of a service is $1,000, and the state and federal government split is 50-50, the state might add a 5% provider tax that would bring the total cost of the service to $1,050. That would mean that the federal government would reimburse the state $525, rather than $500. The House measure aims to lower federal costs by freezing states' provider taxes at current rates and prohibiting them from establishing new provider taxes. Murkowski cited provider taxes as one possible cost-saving measure that's "not going to hurt Alaskans." "It's about $170 billion in savings that could be had if we were to eliminate that," she told The Foraker Group. "To me, that's a real savings."
