东莞哪有算命准灵验的地方(鞍山去哪里算命) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — For decades, California and the federal government have had a co-parenting agreement when it comes to the state's diverse population of endangered species and the scarce water that keeps them alive.Now, it appears the sides could be headed for a divorce.State lawmakers sent to the governor early Saturday morning a bill aimed at stopping the Trump administration from weakening oversight of longstanding federal environmental laws in California. The lawmakers want to make it easier for state regulators to issue emergency regulations when that happens."The feds are taking away significant pieces of water protection law, of air protection law, and California has to step into the void," Democratic Assemblyman Mark Stone said.Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has 30 days to decide whether to veto the bill, sign it into law or allow it to become law without his signature.The bill survived a furious lobbying effort on the Legislature's final day, withstanding opposition from the state's water contractors and Democratic U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein."We can't really have a California system and a federal system," said Jeffrey Kightlinger, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which delivers water to nearly 19 million people. "We're all in the same country here, so we need to find a way to make this work."California has a history of blunting Republican efforts at the federal level to roll back environmental protections. In 2003, shortly after the George W. Bush administration lowered federal Clean Air Act standards, the Legislature passed a law banning California air quality management districts from revising rules and regulations to match.More recently, after the Trump administration announced plans to roll back auto mileage and emission standards, Newsom used the state's regulatory authority to broker a deal with four major automakers to toughen the standards anyway.State lawmakers tried this last year, but a similar proposal failed to pass the state Assembly. But advocates say several recent announcements by the Trump administration — including plans to weaken application of the federal Endangered Species Act — have strengthened support for the bill.The bill would potentially play out most prominently in the management of the state's water, which mostly comes from snowmelt and rain that rushes through a complex system of aqueducts to provide drinking water for nearly 40 million people and irrigation to the state's billion agricultural industry.The bill would make it easier for state regulators to add animals protected under California's Endangered Species Act — animals that have historically been protected under federal law. It would then apply the state's Endangered Species Act to the Central Valley Project, a federally operated system of aqueducts and reservoirs that control flooding and supply irrigation to farmers.But it's not clear if a state law would apply to a federal project, "which could generate years of litigation and uncertainty over which environmental standards apply," according to a letter by Feinstein and four members of the state's Democratic congressional delegation.Plus, Kightlinger warns the proposal would disrupt complex negotiations among state and federal entities and water agencies over the Water Quality Control Plan. If all sides can sign these voluntary agreements, it would avert costly litigation that would delay environmental protections for fish and other species impacted by the water projects."We're pretty close. We believe we can get to completion by December. If (this bill) passes, half of the water districts pull out and go to litigation instead," Kightlinger said. "That's something that would be terrible for our ecosystem and what we're trying to achieve here."Senate President Pro Tempore Toni Atkins, the bill's author, insisted early Saturday the bill would not impact those voluntary agreements."We really and truly did work in good faith to try to address those concerns," she said. 4049

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom has launched a statewide tour to promote his health care proposals, which include requiring everyone to purchase health insurance and offering subsidies to families of four with incomes as high as 0,000 a year.Newsom's proposals would make California the first state in the country to help people who earn up to 600% of the federal poverty level. People could get about 0 a month to help pay their health insurance premiums.The Democratic governor wants to pay for it by making it a law that everyone has to buy health insurance or pay a penalty. The state would use the penalty money to offer the new subsidies.Newsom discussed the proposal with small business owners in Sacramento on Tuesday. 763

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday announced that he is commuting the sentences of 21 inmates, most serving life terms and several who otherwise had no chance of ever leaving prison. The decisions give them a chance at release if a parole board agrees. They are:— Allen Burnett (Orange County) was 18 in 1992 when he and two others carjacked a college student and another man fatally shot the victim. Burnett has served 27 years of a life-without-parole term for first-degree murder. Newsom cited the fact that Burnett, now 45, was a youthful offender who has participated in a prison honor program since 2010 and whose commutation was supported by an associate warden. He commuted Burnett's sentence to 27 years to life.— Alex Barajas (Santa Clara County) was 21 in 2005 when he shot a rival gang member and the man's friend, injuring them both. He is now 35 and has served nearly 14 years of an 80-years-to-life term for two counts of attempted murder, which included two sentencing enhancements of 25 years to life for using a firearm. Barajas has participated in a program that teaches inmates job and life skills. Newsom's commutation makes Barajas eligible for a parole suitability hearing after another year in prison. Newsom cited his young age at the time and what he termed "his disproportionately long sentencing enhancements."— Jaime Cabrales (Los Angeles County) was 27 in 2007 when he was sentenced to 32 years to life for attempted murder for a gang-related shooting. A passenger in the car Cabrales was driving shot at four men, injuring one. The commutation makes Cabrales, now 39, eligible for a parole suitability hearing. Newsom cited Cabrales's self-improvement efforts in prison.— Cristina Chavez (Los Angeles County) was 21 in 2008 when she drove a man to a house to burglarize a car. Chavez fired a BB gun at the car owner's brother when he confronted them, but the pellet hit another vehicle. Later that year, a woman identified as Chavez shot and injured a man in his car at a fast-food restaurant drive-through. She is serving a sentence of 34 years and 8 months to life. It includes an sentencing enhancement of 25 years to life for using a firearm in the restaurant shooting. Chavez, now 33, has served 11 years in prison. The commutation will make her eligible for a parole suitability hearing. Newsom cited her young age at the time and what he called "her disproportionately long sentence."— Andrew Crater (Sacramento County) was 20 in 1995 when he took part in a string of robberies that ended with his accomplice killing a victim. Crater, now 43, has served more than 24 years of a life-without-parole sentence. His clemency appeal was backed by two wardens. It reduces his sentence to 25 years to life. Newsom cited his youth at the time of the crime and his self-improvement efforts in prison.— Keefe Dashiell (Los Angeles County) was 19 in 2007 when he was involved in a gang-related shooting that injured a woman. Dashiell, now 31, has served nearly 11 years of a 30-year term for attempted murder, which included 20 years of sentencing enhancements. The commutation makes Dashiell eligible for a parole suitability hearing. Newsom cited support from prison staff and what he called Dashiell's "disproportionately long sentencing enhancements."— Leonia Esteem (Riverside County) was 47 when she tried to kill her boyfriend during an argument. She is now 61 and has served nearly 14 years of a 32-years-to-life term for attempted murder, including a 25-years-to-life enhancement for use of a firearm. The commutation makes Esteem eligible for a parole suitability hearing. Newsom cited her self-improvement efforts and what Newsom called her "disproportionately long sentencing enhancements."— Jacoby Felix (Sacramento County) was 18 in 1993 when he and an accomplice fatally shot a man while trying to steal his car. He is now 43 and has served nearly 26 years of a life-without-parole sentence. Newsom commuted his sentence to 26 years to life. He cited Felix's youth at the time of the crime and his self-improvement efforts in prison.—Dimitri Gales (Los Angeles County) was 19 when his accomplice shot a rival gang member in the arm, injuring him. Gales, 26, has served seven years of an 18 years-to-life term for attempted voluntary manslaughter in a gang-related shooting. The commutation makes him eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 10th year of incarceration. Newsom cited his "exceptional conduct" in prison and his youth at the time of the shooting.— Theodore Gray (Shasta County) was 22 when he was sentenced to 40 years to life for robbery and murder. He has now served nearly 20 years in prison, where he earned a bachelor's degree and is a certified alcohol- and drug-treatment counselor. Newsom said Gray has been formally commended by staff 79 times for his positive attitude and influence on other inmates. The commutation will make him eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 25th year of incarceration.— Crystal Jones (Sacramento County) was 20 in 1999 when he and an accomplice killed a man during a drug-related murder. He has served nearly 20 years of a life-without-parole sentence and is now 41. Newsom said Jones is currently a hospice worker and has been commended by prison staff for his dedication to his work. He commuted Jones' sentence to 25 years to life.— Marcus McJimpson (Fresno County) was 21 in 1988 when he shot and killed two men during an altercation. He has served 31 years on two life-without-parole sentences and is now 52. Newsom said he was a founding member of the Paws for Life dog training program. He commuted the sentence to 35 years to life.— Adonis Muldrow (Santa Clara County) was 15 when he and a 26-year-old accomplice robbed four businesses, and his accomplice fatally shot a man during a carjacking. Both men shot at a pursuing police officer, who was not seriously injured. The commutation makes Muldrow eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 10th year of incarceration, about 2022. Newsom cited the fact that he was a minor at the time of his crime.— Maurice Nails (Alameda County) was 21 in 2007 when he fatally shot a man after a dispute outside of a nightclub. Nails, now 33, has served 11 years of a 40-years-to-life sentence, including a 25-years-to-life sentencing enhancement for using a firearm. The commutation makes him eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 15th year of incarceration, about 2022. Newsom cited his young age at the time of the killing and what the governor called his "disproportionately long sentencing enhancements."— Alladin Pangilinan (Alameda County) was 19 when he was sentenced to 69 years and 8 months to life for first-degree murder. Pangilinan was sentenced as a repeat offender for his role in three gang-related crimes that ended with an accomplice killing a suspected rival gang member. Pangilinan, 42, has served more than 23 years in prison. The commutation makes him eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 25th year of incarceration. Newsom cited his age at the time of the crimes and what he termed "disproportionately long sentencing enhancements."— Doris Roldan (Los Angeles County) was 42 when she worked with two accomplices to kill her husband in 1981. She is now 80 and has served 38 years of a sentence of life without chance of parole. Her warden recommended her commutation, which reduces her sentence to 38 years to life. Newsom cited her "exceptional conduct in prison."— Bryant Salas (Los Angeles County) was 18 in 2007 when he participated in a gang-related fight during which an accomplice stabbed two men, killing one. Salas, 30, has served 12 years of a 32-years-to-life term for second-degree murder. Newsom cited his participation in an honors program and the Paws for Life service dog training program. The commutation will make Salas eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 15th year of incarceration, about 2021.— Lazaro Tanori (Los Angeles County) was 19 in 2006 when he tried to rob a pawn shop at gunpoint, though no one was injured. He was sentenced to 21 years and 4 months in prison for attempted robbery, including a 20-year enhancement for using a gun. He is now 32 and has served 13 years. The commutation makes him eligible for a parole suitability hearing. Newsom cited his youth and what he called "his disproportionately long sentencing enhancement."— Marsi Torres (Los Angeles County) was 18 when she shot a 16-year-old rival gang member, who survived. She has served more than 12 years of a 50-years-to-life term for attempted murder. The sentence included a 25-years-to-life enhancement for using a firearm and a 10-year gang enhancement. Newsom said Torres, 30, has been commended by staff for her positive attitude and commitment to assisting other inmates. The commutation makes her eligible for a parole suitability hearing.— Antonio Toy (Los Angeles County) was 23 when he shot a man in the leg after an altercation. He is now 33 and has served nearly 10 years of a 39-years-to-life sentence for attempted murder, which included a sentencing enhancement of 25 years to life for using a firearm. The commutation makes him eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 15th year of incarceration. Newsom cited Toy's youth at the time of the crime what the governor termed his "disproportionately long sentencing enhancement."— Luis Velez (Sacramento County) was 26 when he killed an armed transport guard during a robbery. He has served more than 28 years of a life-without-parole sentence. Newsom commuted the sentence for Velez, now 55, to 28 years to life. He cited Velez's "exceptional conduct and self-development efforts in prison." 9722

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom cracked down on oil producers Tuesday, halting approval of hundreds of fracking permits until independent scientists can review them and temporarily banning new wells using another drilling method that regulators believe is linked to one of the largest spills in state history.The state Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources announced it will not approve new wells that use high-pressure steam to extract oil from underground. It’s the type of process Chevron uses at an oil field in the Central Valley that leaked more than 1.3 million gallons (4.9 million liters) of oil and water this summer.That process is different from fracking, which uses water and other chemicals at high pressure to extract oil. California has 263 pending fracking permits but has not approved any of them since July. That’s when Newsom fired California’s top oil and gas regulator after learning the state had increased fracking permits by 35% since he took office in January, angering environmental groups.Newsom, a Democrat, called the crackdown necessary to strengthen the state’s oversight of oil and gas extraction “as we phase out our dependence on fossil fuels and focus on clean energy sources.”“This transition cannot happen overnight; it must advance in a deliberate way to protect people, our environment and our economy,” Newsom said.California has been a leader on environmental issues, with Newsom's Democratic predecessor, Jerry Brown, making climate change his signature effort. Brown was criticized for failing to ban fracking or oil drilling, arguing that the state needed to tackle demand before moving on to supply.The oil industry called Newsom’s changes “disappointing,” with the Western States Petroleum Association saying California’s environmental regulations already lead the world.“Every barrel delayed or not produced in this state will only increase imports from more costly foreign sources that do not share our environmental safety standards,” group president Catherine Reheis-Boyd.California is one of the top five states for oil production, producing more than 161 million barrels last year. Fracking occurs in some of the state’s largest oil fields, mostly in the Central Valley.The steam method is less prevalent but accounted for 8 million barrels of the state’s oil production in 2018, according to the Department of Conservation. But regulators believe it is linked to the oil spill at a Chevron well that began in May.It was the largest oil spill in California since 1990, when a tanker unleashed more than 400,000 gallons (1.5 million liters) of crude oil off the coast of Huntington Beach.But despite its size, the Chevron spill has had minimal effects on the environment.The oil spilled into a dry creek bed, and the company cleaned it up before rains could wash it into fresh water. It also did not significantly harm wildlife, with just a “handful of birds” needing to be euthanized, according to Jason Marshall, chief deputy director of the California Department of Conservation.A second well at the oil field about 35 miles (55 kilometers) west of Bakersfield has been leaking intermittently since 2003. State officials ordered Chevron to stop the leak in April, and the company has been making progress, Marshall said.Regulators have fined the energy giant .7 million for the leaks. A Chevron spokeswoman referred comment to the Western States Petroleum Association, whose leader said, “There is nothing more important than the health and safety of the communities where the women and men of our industry work, live and raise their families."The moratorium will be in place while two national laboratories — Lawrence Livermore and Sandia — study the high-pressure steam process to see what regulations, if any, can make it safer. Other wells in California use the steam method and have not had any spills.“These oil leaks cannot be the cost of doing business,” California Natural Resources Secretary Wade Crowfoot said. “There needs to be a clear trajectory to eliminate them. Not reduce them in number, but fully eliminate them.”The moratorium will not affect existing wells, which will be assessed individually. Some existing wells have been using high-pressure steam for so long that stopping it could weaken the geology and cause more spills, Crowfoot said.Officials said they would seek an independent audit of California’s permitting process for fracking and other types of oil extraction.In July, advocacy groups Consumer Watchdog and FracTracker revealed the state’s fracking permits had doubled during the first six months of Newsom’s administration. The groups said that of those permits, 45% benefited companies where state officials owned stock.Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog, called Newsom’s new orders “an important step toward reining in the most high risk extraction techniques.”“The ultimate test of his tenure for climate change and the public will be simple math about how many fewer permits are issued and how many existing wells are closed,” Court said. “Net zero wells should be his goal.” 5122

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California utilities again are facing severe financial pressures from the possibility that their equipment sparked catastrophic wildfires, including two that are now burning at either end of the state.The pressure comes even though Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation in September giving utilities some relief beginning next year.The law made it easier for utilities to pass along costs from fire-related damages to consumers and also avoid possible bankruptcy from a series of major fires that occurred during the 2017 fire season that produced more than billion in losses.But there was a gap in the law: No damages specific to 2018 were included, so utilities face a higher bar to bill customers to cover those costs. And this year already supplanted 2017 as the most destructive in California's recorded history.Authorities have not determined a cause for either of two major blazes burning now, but Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison have reported irregularities with their equipment near the time and place where both ignited.A woman who owns land near the site where a deadly wildfire started in Northern California said Monday that Pacific Gas & Electric Co. sought access to her property just before the blaze started because the utility's power lines were causing sparks.PG&E shares have lost more than a third of their value since the Camp Fire broke out northeast of San Francisco, destroying thousands of homes and killing dozens of people as it leveled the town of Paradise.Moody's Investors Service said Monday that the "shortcomings" in the legislation reflect negatively on PG&E's credit rating, which is barely investment grade."Moody's negative outlook incorporates the view that additional financial stress for PG&E is likely," Moody's spokesman Joe Mielenhausen said in an email. "Going forward, we will look for signs of additional legislative and regulatory support for the utility as it works through various legal processes."Last week PG&E told state regulators that it detected a problem on an electrical transmission line near the site of the blaze minutes before the fire broke out. The utility later said it observed damage to a transmission tower on the line, and a PG&E spokeswoman said the company will cooperate with any investigations.Betsy Ann Cowley, a property owner near the site said PG&E sought access to the area before the fire started, telling her power lines were sparking.Southern California Edison told regulators there was an outage on an electrical circuit near the site where the Woolsey Fire started in Ventura County. It quickly spread into Malibu and destroyed hundreds of homes.SoCal Edison said the report was submitted out of an abundance of caution and there was no indication from fire officials that its equipment may have been involved. The report said the fire was reported around 2:24 p.m. Thursday, two minutes after the outage.Shares of parent company Edison International have tumbled more than 20 percent since the fire started.California is one of just two states that hold electric companies entirely liable for damage caused by their equipment, even if they followed all safety precautions. The new law makes it easier for them to pass some of those costs along to consumers.Utilities lobbied aggressively to eliminate that strict liability standard but lawmakers dropped the idea amid pressure from insurers, trial lawyers and fire victims.Instead, legislators passed a law making it easier for utilities to manage the costs without going bankrupt. They created two mechanisms for investor-owned utilities to shift the costs of wildfire lawsuits onto their customers— one process that begins in 2019, and another for the 2017 fires.For reasons that remain unclear, the law left the rules unchanged for 2018."The priority was on addressing 2017 victims and putting in place some fire-safety measures," said Paul Payne, a spokesman for Sen. Bill Dodd, a Napa Democrat and the bill's author. "The focus was on making 2017 victims whole."It's too soon to say whether the Legislature will take up another fight over the 2018 fires, Payne said.SoCal Edison officials say the Legislature needs to do more to shield utilities from wildfire-related liability."SCE believes the state can do more, including enacting fire-smart building codes, particularly in high fire risk areas, and ensuring the proper allocation of risk for the often-tragic consequences of wildfires," spokeswoman Justina Garcia wrote in an email.A PG&E spokesman, Paul Doherty, did not respond to questions about the legislation, saying "our entire company is focused on supporting first responders."Sen. Jerry Hill, a Redwood City Democrat and longtime critic of PG&E, called the report of troubles on PG&E's lines in the area extremely worrisome."At some point we have to say enough is enough and we have to ask: Should this company be allowed to do business in California?" Hill said. "These fires take a spark, and at least in the last few years fires have been caused by negligent behavior by PG&E. We need to see how we can hold them responsible, or look at alternative way of doing business."Hill said he was exploring legislative options to keep a closer check on PG&E, including the possibility of breaking up the utility."They are a monopoly and they act as a monopoly," Hill said. "That is a problem when the motive is profit, and that just may not be the right motive for providing utility services." 5560

来源：资阳报