The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
William S. Cohen served as mayor of Bangor, a U.S. representative, U.S. senator and secretary of defense.
I had the honor of representing Maine in the U.S. House for six years and the U.S. Senate for 18 years, after which I served four years as secretary of defense.
During those years, I came to understand what really makes an effective senator, and how vital it is for a small state like Maine that its senators are people of real impact and influence — and how damaging it can be if they are not taken seriously.
I look at three measures in particular.
A look at the numbers is instructive. Since 2000, when the Senate was split 50-50, the margin of control has fluctuated but generally stayed under 10; today it is 53-47 for Republicans. In practical terms, that means a small number of centrist senators, whose votes are not a sure thing for either party, hold the greatest influence, while the most ideologically predictable senators are easily dismissed and left out of the coalitions that actually shape legislation.
I was never considered an automatic vote for my party, which meant I was constantly part of whatever coalition actually determined the outcome of legislative compromises — giving me real leverage to achieve good results for Maine.
Beyond the centrists who shape legislation, a second undeniable measure of influence is seniority and who chairs the most important committees. In the Senate, no committee is more important than Appropriations, which determines where and how hundreds of billions of dollars are spent — and its chair can also ensure their home state receives a fair, and sometimes more than fair, share of funding. I had many spirited battles with Appropriations chairs, generally well-entrenched Southerners, to make sure Maine received an equitable amount of federal support.
Finally, as in any group of 100 people, it quickly becomes clear who are the showhorses focused on getting headlines (and, now, “likes”) and who are the workhorses doing the hard, often unglamorous work of shaping important legislation and attending to their constituents’ needs.
Weighing this year’s Senate race in Maine against those three measures, I believe reelecting Susan Collins is both important and urgent for Maine.
Throughout her career, Susan has been one of the Senate’s thoughtful centrists, sought out by leaders of both parties because she decides issues on their merits rather than based on party politics. Now, as chair of the Appropriations Committee — the first Mainer to hold that post in nearly a century — she is directing resources to statewide priorities. Hundreds of community projects have been approved, creating thousands of jobs, and she has fought off proposed cuts under both Presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump to preserve funding for diabetes and Alzheimer’s research and treatment, among many other important areas.
And within that small universe of 100 senators, Susan is deeply respected for doing her homework, knowing the issues thoroughly, never missing a vote, and staying constantly engaged with Maine communities. By any measure, she is a serious player whose influence benefits people across the state.
I acknowledge I am not unbiased. I have known Susan for more than 50 years, and she once worked on my House and Senate staff. But it is that knowledge of her, combined with my understanding of how the Senate works, that shapes my view.
I don’t know Troy Jackson. I respect his Aroostook County roots, his advocacy for Maine loggers, and his long service in Augusta. But he has aligned himself with the more extreme wing of his party, which would likely make him a predictable, marginal freshman senator. Replacing one of the Senate’s most influential members with someone of likely limited impact would be a devastating loss of influence for Maine.
By comparison, when Angus King succeeded Olympia Snowe in 2012, though he was a “freshman senator,” he quickly had significant impact, thanks to his record as governor and a businessman and his independent approach. Charitably put, I don’t believe Jackson is in that league.
Some Maine voters think Susan isn’t supportive enough of Donald Trump; others think she isn’t critical enough. I faced a similar dynamic with President Richard Nixon early in my career — supporting him when I thought he was right, opposing him when I thought he was wrong. That independence cost me votes and friendships, but I believed most Maine voters would value it even when they disagreed with a particular decision.
Susan has opposed Trump more than nearly any other Republican senator, publicly declining to support him in any of his campaigns and voting against him on Obamacare repeal, the Iran War, and other key issues. That may not satisfy everyone, but it reflects independent judgment rather than blind party loyalty.
I haven’t agreed with Susan on every issue — nor with anyone else on everything. That’s an unrealistic standard; people of good will can disagree.
If Maine voters weigh this carefully, I believe they will conclude, as I have, that replacing one of the most effective, influential and respected senators in our state’s history is not in Maine’s best interest.