UMaine’s role in pay-to-play scheme deserves a closer look | Letter
ProPublica’s recent exposé of Sen. Susan Collins’ alleged “pay‑to‑play” scheme has sent shockwaves through Maine’s political and academic circles. The investigative report, released in early September 2026, alleges that Collins secured significant campaign contributions from companies that had, in turn, sought contracts and research funding at the University of Maine. The findings suggest that the university may have benefited from the senator’s largesse, raising concerns about the integrity of its research mission and the potential influence of political donors on academic priorities.
In the wake of the story, retired English professor Tony Brinkley penned a letter to the editor of the Press Herald. Brinkley, who served on the University of Maine faculty in Bangor, called the university’s response “beggar[ing] belief” that its administration had not understood the nature of Collins’ strategy. He urged the university to “thoroughly investigate” the claim of innocence it has so far asserted.
Brinkley’s letter also raised a series of pointed questions that frame the broader debate about the intersection of politics and research funding. He asked, “To what extent has research at Maine’s institution been dependent on the senator’s largesse, and to what extent has this largesse been determined on the senator’s need for campaign funds?” He followed that with inquiries about whether the university’s research priorities align with the best interests of Maine residents and students, and whether the senator’s interests might be corrupting the institution.
The letter concludes that while ProPublica has “played its part,” “Maine’s media should now play theirs.” The call for independent journalism reflects a growing sentiment that local outlets should scrutinize the university’s ties to political figures and their donors.
Sen. Susan Collins, a long‑time Republican senator from Maine, has long been known for her independent voting record. She has faced scrutiny over her ties to the wood‑composite industry, a sector that has historically contributed to her campaign. The ProPublica report suggests that these contributions may have translated into research contracts at the University of Maine, though the investigation does not yet detail specific projects or funding amounts.
The University of Maine, the state’s flagship research university located in Bangor, has not yet issued a formal statement in response to the investigation. Its administration has, in the past, defended the institution’s compliance with federal and state regulations governing research funding. However, the letter’s insistence that the administration “did not understand” Collins’ pay‑to‑play strategy casts doubt on the university’s internal oversight mechanisms.
As the story unfolds, local media outlets, state lawmakers, and university officials are likely to weigh in. The Maine political landscape—already tense with the 2026 election cycle underway—may find itself confronting questions about the ethical boundaries of campaign finance and research funding. For now, the investigation has opened a window into a potentially troubling relationship between a state senator, her donors, and the state’s premier research institution.
