山西痔疮能治疗好吗-【山西肛泰院】,HaKvMMCN,山西大便滴血是什么原因,山西治疗女性痔疮医院,太原市肛肠医院在线,山西痔疮会自己脱落吗,太原小肚子疼拉出来血怎么回事,太原肛门病太原哪家医院好

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California would bar forced arbitration and nondisclosure agreements under a bill sent to Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday that enjoys celebrity backing from some in the #MeToo movement.It would prohibit employers from requiring nondisclosure agreements related to sexual misconduct as a condition of getting or keeping a job. It also would ban employers from requiring arbitration agreements, which can force employees to settle workplace complaints instead of going to court, as a condition of employment.The bill has the backing of actress and activist Jane Fonda and former Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson.Current law "allows companies to force employee complaints in to secret proceedings" and can be used to protect "serial offenders" in the workplace, said Democratic Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson of Santa Barbara.Companies can still require arbitration under the bill, but not as a as a condition of employment, she said."To force someone to enter into these agreements is not acceptable, and that's what this bill addresses," she said. The bill "gives people access to justice in a fair and impartial way."The bill would not prevent existing arbitration or nondisclosure agreements from being enforced.Republican Sen. Jeff Stone of Temecula, the only senator who spoke in opposition, called the bill "another job killer" that can drive companies out of California and mainly benefits trial lawyers by forcing more disputes into already overwhelmed courts.Most workers can often get a better and quicker resolution through arbitration than by filing a lawsuit, he said.That may be true for unionized employees whose unions can help choose arbitrators, said Democratic Sen. Connie Leyva of Chino, but she said companies have an unfair advantage over non-union employees because the employer then controls the arbitration process.The measure was approved by the state Senate, 25-12. It was one of a number of bills introduced after dozens of women went public with stories of sexual misconduct.Carlson, who spoke in favor of the bill in May, sued Fox News Channel CEO Roger Ailes in 2016, alleging she was fired for rejecting his sexual advances. Ailes, who died last year, said Carlson's contract prohibited her from going public until both sides first tried closed-door arbitration. Ailes was ultimately forced out of the network because of her allegations. 2393
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) — 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
SACO, Maine – A man in Maine has been arrested after authorities say he was caught putting razor blades into pizza dough that was then sold to customers.The Saco Police Department says it was notified of the tampered food by the city’s Hannaford Supermarket last Tuesday. Officers say a customer had purchased a Portland Pie pizza dough and later discovered razor blades inside.“The review of store security surveillance footage revealed a person tampered with the packaging of several Portland Pie pizza doughs,” wrote the department in a statement.Police have identified the suspect as 38-year-old Nicholas Mitchell and said he’s a former associate of It’ll Be Pizza company, which manufactures products for Portland Pie.A warrant was issued for Mitchell’s arrest and he was later taken into custody in Dover, New Hampshire, according to police.As a result of the incident, Hannaford Supermarkets has issued a recall for all Portland Pie branded products sold at its stores.The supermarket chain says customers who purchased Portland Pie pizza dough or cheese sold in its delis between Aug. 1 and Oct. 11 should not consume the products. They may return it to the store for a full refund.Additionally, the chain says it has removed all Portland Pie products from its shelves and paused replenishment of the products indefinitely, “after what is believed to be further malicious tampering incidents involving metal objects inserted into Portland Pie products.”Law enforcement is continuing to investigate the tampering. If you have purchased Portland Pie pizza dough and have found razor blades inside the dough, call the Saco Police Department's Detective Division at (207)282-8216. 1692
Roger Stone associate Jerome Corsi said Monday he expects to be indicted by special counsel Robert Mueller for "giving false information to the special counsel or to one of the other grand jury."Corsi made the comment during his streaming show on YouTube."And now I fully anticipate that the next few days, I will be indicted by Mueller for some form or other of giving false information to the special counsel or to one of the other grand jury or however they want to do the indictment. But I'm going to be criminally charged," Corsi said Monday.Corsi's lawyer declined to comment.Corsi could face any number of charges -- spanning from perjury to making false claims to obstruction of justice. The potential charges are related to false statements he made about his relationship with WikiLeaks and Stone.Corsi has been involved in Mueller's investigation for roughly two months and had already been subpoenaed for documents and testimony before the grand jury, and he complied with both.Corsi's role in the investigation largely revolves around the possibility that he was an intermediary between Stone and WikiLeaks.During the 2016 campaign, Stone publicly bragged about having "backchannel communications" with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, and on several occasions appeared to predict the WikiLeaks releases that roiled the race in the final stretch of the campaign. But in the two years since Trump's victory, Stone has walked back those claims and said his "backchannel" was merely New York radio host Randy Credico sharing information about his interviews with Assange. Credico denies serving as an intermediary between the two.Investigators have been skeptical of Stone's explanation. CNN has reported that?Mueller's team is examining the possibility that Stone had another intermediary beyond Credico, and that Corsi might have been involved.Corsi injected himself into Stone's situation last year when he claimed that one of his own articles for InfoWars inspired Stone to predict in October 2016 that there would be trouble coming for Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta. Not long after that, WikiLeaks started releasing thousands of Podesta's hacked emails.Stone denies that he ever told Trump about WikiLeaks' dumps before they became public. He also denies colluding with Russia.The-CNN-Wire 2331
来源:资阳报