By MARY CLARE JALONICK, MATT BROWN and JOEY CAPPELLETTI

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans were jubilant after muscling through President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful” tax and immigration package by a single vote. But across the Capitol, senators were more cautious.

Related Articles

Trump relishes uttering the outlandish. Here’s where some of his most showstopping comments stand

Apple has had few incentives in the past to start making iPhones in US

DOGE targets Census Bureau, worrying data users about health of US data infrastructure

Federal judge blocks Trump administration from barring foreign student enrollment at Harvard

Trump threatens 50% tariffs on EU and 25% penalties on Apple as his trade war intensifies

Senate Majority Leader John Thune can afford to lose three Republican senators and still pass the bill, and there are more than that, right now, who have problems with it. Like the House, he will have to balance the concerns from moderate and conservative members of his conference.

Republicans’ aspirational deadline is July 4, ahead of a potential debt default. Thune said groups of senators had already been meeting to discuss the legislation and that they would want to take some time to review it. “And then we’ll put our stamp on it,” he said.

“We’ll see how it goes,” Thune said. “What does it take to get to 51?”

A look at a few of the potential sticking points in the Senate:

Spending

Several Republican senators have said the House’s multi-trillion-dollar tax package doesn’t have enough savings. Thune said many in his GOP conference favor the tax breaks in the bill but “when it comes to the spending side of the equation, this is a unique moment in time, in history, where we have the House and the Senate and the White House, and an opportunity to do something meaningful about how to control government spending.”

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., a sharp critic of the House bill, wants the United States to go back to pre-pandemic spending levels. He has indicated he would be a no on the bill as it stands now, and he says he has at least three other senators aligned with him.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., speaks to reporters at the Capitol, Tuesday, May 20, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

Medicaid and food stamp cuts

Senate Republicans are generally on board with stricter work requirements for older Medicaid recipients that make up much of the bill’s $700 billion savings from the program. But Republican Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri, Jerry Moran of Kansas and Susan Collins of Maine, among others, have voiced concerns about other changes in the bill that could potentially cut funding to rural hospitals or increase copays and other health care costs for recipients.

The senators could have a powerful ally in Trump, who has frequently said he doesn’t want cuts to Medicaid, even as he’s endorsed the House bill. Hawley said he talked to Trump this week on the phone and “his exact words were, ‘Don’t touch it, Josh.’”

Others have been wary of the House bill’s effort to shift some costs of the food stamp program to states, potentially a major issue for some red states that have high numbers of food aid recipients. The House bill saves $290 billion from the food aid, and Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Boozman said the Senate savings will be “probably be a little bit lower.”

Permanent tax cuts

Thune said this week that “one of the principal differences” between the House and Senate is that Republican senators want to make many of the tax cuts permanent while the House bill has shorter time frames for many of its cuts — including no taxes on tips, overtime pay, car-loan interest and others.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo said Thursday that trying to make some of the cuts permanent is “an objective right now.”

How to pay for it all

One of the biggest questions for the Senate: whether the tax breaks really need to be offset by cuts elsewhere.

To offset the costs of lost tax revenue, House Republicans have proposed more than $1 trillion in spending reductions across Medicaid, food stamps and green energy program rollbacks. However, Republicans in the Senate do not believe there is a cost associated with permanently extending the existing taxes, setting up a political and procedural showdown ahead.

Debt limit

The House bill includes a $4 trillion increase in the debt limit. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has warned that the United States is on track to run out of money to pay its bills as early as August without congressional action.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said he won’t support the bill if the debt ceiling increase is included. He said he’s willing to consider it if it’s taken out.

But most Republican senators want it to avoid a separate fight that would require 60 votes in the Senate. Texas Sen. John Cornyn said that if they deal with the debt ceiling outside of the legislation then they would have to “pay a king’s ransom” to Democrats to get enough votes.

Energy tax credits

Several Republican senators have said they are concerned about House provisions that repeal or phase out clean energy tax credits passed in 2022 that have spurred investment in many states.

Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, John Curtis of Utah and Moran wrote Thune a letter last month arguing that removing the credits could “create uncertainty, jeopardizing capital allocation, long-term project planning, and job creation in the energy sector and across our broader economy.”

Artificial intelligence

The House bill would ban states and localities from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade, giving the federal government more control over the policy. It’s an approach that has been favored by the AI industry but has drawn concern from members on both sides of the aisle.

And even if it has enough support, the provision may not pass muster from the Senate parliamentarian because it’s unlikely to have impact on the federal budget.

Other issues

With a narrow margin for victory and only 53 Republicans in the Senate, every senator’s top priority takes on outsize importance. South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds said he supports the House bill but that the way that it deals with spectrum auctions — selling off telecommunications signal rights — is a “dealbreaker” for him. He said he’s in talks with other senators on the issue.

Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., said one of his main goals is that they include money for certain farm safety net programs and set up passage for a broader farm bill later this year.

“In the end, we have to have 50 plus one supporting it,” Hoeven said. “So we’ve got some work to do.”

Associated Press writer Lisa Mascaro contributed to this story.

“When people see the composting process up close—when they hold the finished product in their hands—they’re far more likely to separate their food scraps at home.”

A May 2024 rally outside City Hall against funding cuts to community composting programs. (Gerardo Romo / NYC Council Media Unit)

As the City Council debates the 2026 budget, there’s real concern that community composting could be eliminated—again. It happened in 2023. It could happen this year too.

That would be a huge mistake.

That’s because while New York City has finally made composting easy, the question remains: will people do it?

The city’s new curbside composting program—which was rolled out last fall but became mandatory for most residents beginning April 1—means New Yorkers can put food scraps and other food waste in a brown bin and set it out like they do their recycling. But infrastructure alone won’t make it a success.

Right now, participation is low. Only 4.6 percent of compostable materials are being diverted. That means 270,000 tons of food scraps were trashed in just the last quarter of 2024—wasted resources that could have enriched soil and cut emissions.

The problem isn’t access. It’s behavior. And behavior doesn’t change through mandates alone. New York has a chance to lead the way—not just by building the infrastructure, but by building the culture.

That’s where community composting comes in. These local programs don’t just process food scraps and create compost for city trees, parks, and gardens. They close the gap between policy and participation. When people see the composting process up close—when they hold the finished product in their hands—they’re far more likely to separate their food scraps at home.

This behavioral shift is critical: a study this year by the CUNY School of Public Health found that 85.8 percent of participants in community composting programs reported increased awareness of food waste, and 71.5 percent said they had reduced their household waste.

Community composting doesn’t compete with curbside composting—it fuels it. And the environment needs both types of composting now more than ever.

Food scraps in a landfill don’t just disappear—they rot, release methane, and add to the climate mess. Curbside compost largely turns food waste into biofuel. Community composting turns waste into rich, healthy soil that holds water, strengthens plants, and actually gives something back to the planet. 

Combined, these composting efforts can cut greenhouse gas emissions in half. That’s the difference between keeping carbon in the soil or pumping methane into the air. If we’re looking for an easy climate win, this is it.

Unfortunately, community composting has been treated as expendable, despite its proven impact. In 2023, the Adams administration eliminated all funding, forcing small-scale composters to scrape by on private donations. 

It took sustained advocacy—rallies, hearings, public pressure—for the City Council to restore $6.245 million in the last fiscal year budget.

But even with this victory, the funding shift underscores a troubling reality: community composting remains vulnerable. Unlike curbside composting, which has dedicated city resources, community-based programs constantly have to fight for their existence.

Yet these programs do what policy alone cannot—they educate, engage, and create the cultural shift necessary to make composting a habit. They also give residents an option. While the curbside program generates biofuel, community composting offers a truly circular system—one that regenerates soil and strengthens local ecosystems.

If New York is serious about reducing waste and cutting emissions, it must do more than save community composting from the budget axe. It must treat it as an essential part of our composting infrastructure, not an afterthought.

Christine Datz-Romero is the co-founder and executive director of the Lower East Side Ecology Center.

The post Opinion: Why NYC Needs Community Composting to Make Curbside Collections Work appeared first on City Limits.

By HUIZHONG WU and RAJESH ROY

BANGKOK (AP) — The Chinese government said Friday that the Trump administration’s move to ban international students from Harvard would harm America’s international standing, as anxious students and parents overseas fretted over what would come next.

Related Articles

Kim Kardashian robbery case nears end as Paris court prepares verdict

Rescue efforts underway for 260 workers trapped in a South African gold mine

Iran-US talks made ‘some but not conclusive progress,’ mediator Oman says

Russia and Ukraine say a major prisoner swap has begun

Today in History: May 23, outlaws Bonnie and Clyde killed in police ambush

Among the two largest parts of the international student community in Harvard are Chinese and Indian students. The university enrolled 6,703 international students across all of its schools in 2024, according to the school’s data, with 1,203 of those from China and 788 from India.

The Trump administration’s move, announced Thursday, was a hot topic on Chinese social media. State broadcaster CCTV questioned whether the U.S. would remain a top destination for foreign students, noting Harvard was already suing the U.S. government in court.

“But with the long litigation period, thousands of international students may have trouble waiting,” the CCTV commentary said.

It went on to say that it becomes necessary for international students to consider other options “when policy uncertainty becomes the norm.”

Educational cooperation with the U.S. is mutually beneficial and China opposes its politicization, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said at a daily briefing in Beijing.

“The relevant actions by the U.S. side will only damage its own image and international credibility,” she said.

She added that China would firmly protect the rights and interests of Chinese students and scholars abroad but she didn’t offer any details on how it would do so in this situation.

Indian authorities say they currently assessing the impact of the U.S. order on Indian students who are already enrolled with Harvard, as well as those aspiring to study there in future, but have not issued any statements of criticism.

Chinese students in U.S. previous point of tension

The issue of Chinese students studying overseas has long been a point of tension in the relationship with the United States. During Trump’s first term, China’s Ministry of Education warned students about rising rejections rates and shorter terms for visas in the U.S.

Last year, the Chinese foreign ministry protested that a number of Chinese students had been interrogated and sent home upon arrival at U.S. airports.

Chinese state media has long played up gun violence in the U.S. and portrayed America as a dangerous place. Some Chinese students are opting to study in the U.K. or other countries rather than the U.S.

CORRECTS THE PHOTOGRAPHER’S NAME – In this image taken from video, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning speaks during a regular briefing held in Beijing, Friday, May 23, 2025. (AP Photo/Liu Zheng)

Meanwhile, two universities in Hong Kong extended invites to affected students. The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology said it would welcome international students already at Harvard and those who have been admitted in a statement Friday. City University in Hong Kong did as well without mentioning Harvard by name.

Some people in China joked online about having the university open a branch in the northeastern Chinese city of Harbin, whose name shares the same character as Harvard’s name in Chinese.

Wait and see

Mumbai-based higher education and career advisory firm, ReachIvy, is receiving anxious queries from aspirants and their parents about the impact of Trump administration’s latest move.

The company’s founder, Vibha Kagzi, herself an alumnus of the Harvard Business School, said they were advising students to keep calm, and wait to see how the situation unfolds as legal challenges were underway.

“Harvard will surely fight back,” she said, adding that the situation remains fluid.

Kagzi, while recalling her days from 2010 at Harvard, said the U.S. was then welcoming international students and its immigration policies supported educational aspirants.

“Indian students should stay hopeful. Universities value global talent and are exploring all options to ensure continuity in admission and learning,” she said.

Associated Press writer Kanis Leung in Hong Kong and AP researcher Shihuan Chen contributed. Roy reported from New Delhi.

By DEE-ANN DURBIN, AP Business Writer

The Republican-controlled Federal Trade Commission is abandoning a Biden-era effort to block Microsoft’s purchase of “Call of Duty” video game maker Activision Blizzard.

Related Articles

Homeowners spend on renovations and repairs despite the uncertain economy and higher prices

Apple has had few incentives in the past to start making iPhones in US

Edmunds: How to get the best auto deals this Memorial Day weekend

Trump’s latest tariff threats knock Wall Street, European stocks and Apple lower

Trump threatens 50% tariffs on EU and 25% penalties on Apple as his trade war intensifies

In an order issued Thursday, the FTC said it had determined that “the public interest is best served by dismissing the administrative litigation in this case.”

It was the second time in one day that the FTC pulled out of litigation begun during the Biden administration. Earlier Thursday, the FTC said it was dismissing a lawsuit against PepsiCo that was filed by the Democratic-controlled FTC in January.

Microsoft announced a $69 billion acquisition of Activision in January 2022. It’s one of the most expensive tech acquisitions in history and was designed to boost sales of Microsoft’s Xbox gaming console, which has lagged in sales behind Sony’s PlayStation and Nintendo.

In December 2022, the Federal Trade Commission – then led by Democratic Chairwoman Lina Khan — sued to temporarily block the acquisition, saying it would let Microsoft suppress competitors who want access to Xbox and its subscription content.

In July 2023, the U.S. District Court in Northern California denied the FTC’s request to pause the acquisition, but the FTC appealed. Earlier this month, a federal appeals court also denied the FTC’s request.

In the meantime, Microsoft completed its purchase of Activision in October 2023 after it won approval from Britain’s competition watchdog, which had also considered blocking the merger.

Brad Smith, Microsoft’s vice chairman and president, said Thursday in a statement on X that the decision is a victory for video game players and for “common sense in Washington D.C.”

“We are grateful to the FTC for today’s announcement,” Smith said.

Khan stepped down from the FTC when President Donald Trump took office in January, and Trump fired Democratic Commissioners Rebecca Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya in March. Bedoya and Slaughter have sued the Trump administration, saying their removal was illegal.

Right now, the FTC is made up of three Republican commissioners, and it’s unclear when the two Democrats on the commission will be replaced. A message seeking comment was left with the FTC.

In the PepsiCo case, FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson said the Biden-era FTC rushed to authorize a case just three days before Trump’s inauguration. He said Thursday that the case, which alleged that PepsiCo was violating the law by giving unfair price advantages to Walmart, was a “dubious political stunt.”

But the FTC hasn’t stood in the way of some Biden-era policies. Earlier this month, a rule the FTC announced in December requiring ticket sellers, hotels, vacation rental platforms and others to disclose their fees up front went into effect.