吉林前列腺炎怎样治吉林男科专家网上预约咨询平台,吉林前列腺炎的检查要多少钱,吉林阴茎根部长了两个肉疙瘩,吉林包皮手术费用多少够,吉林哪个医院包皮手术做的好,吉林较好的治疗阳痿早泄医院,吉林哪家医院割包皮手术

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

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed bills Monday to crack down on doctors who write fraudulent medical exemptions for school children's vaccinations.The Democratic governor acted less than an hour after lawmakers sent him changes he demanded as a condition of approving the bills.Legislators approved the changes as protests by hundreds of emotional opponents boiled over, with dissenters delaying Senate debate for nearly two hours by shouting and pounding on walls and doors.Others were detained by police earlier while blocking entrances to the Capitol as lawmakers scrambled to act on bills before their scheduled adjournment on Friday."This legislation provides new tools to better protect public health, and does so in a way that ensures parents, doctors, public health officials and school administrators all know the rules of the road moving forward," Newsom said in a statement.Lawmakers sent Newsom the initial bill last week aimed at doctors who sell fraudulent medical exemptions. Democratic Sen. Richard Pan of San Francisco agreed to also carry follow-up legislation that among other things would give school children grace periods that could last several years on existing medical exemptions.The two bills are needed to "keep children safe from preventable diseases," Pan said.The effort was co-sponsored by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the California Medical Association and the advocacy group Vaccinate California, all of which hailed their final approval.Protesters forced delays in both the Assembly and Senate. They unfurled an upside-down American flag from the Senate's public gallery in a traditional signal of distress and chanted "My kids, my choice" and "We will not comply."They later returned to the Assembly, where they continued shouting "Kill the bill" and "Protect our children" as lawmakers considered other legislation.Republicans in both chambers objected that there were no public committee hearings before the Assembly approved the measure with a 43-14 vote and the Senate followed on a 27-11 roll call."This goes past vaccines and is again a major government overreach," said Republican Assemblyman Devon Mathis of Visalia, adding that, "Our medically fragile children are what are at stake."Newsom demanded a phase-out period for medical exemptions similar to one allowed when California eliminated personal belief vaccine exemptions in 2015. A kindergartener with an exemption could retain it through 6th grade, for instance, while a 7th grader could be exempted through high school.The companion bill also would allow officials to revoke any medical exemptions written by a doctor who has faced disciplinary action.The bill would make it clear that enforcement will start next year, meaning doctors who previously granted a high number of medical exemptions won't face scrutiny.Republican Sen. John Moorlach of Costa Mesa grew emotional as he recalled a developmentally disabled cousin who died at a young age."That's what these people fear," Moorlach said of protesters. "We've got to hit the pause button."Republican Sen. Jeff Stone of Temecula asked protesters to "watch your democratic process with respect" after a shouting opponent was removed from the gallery by officers. BHe also said it is unfair to label dissenters as "extremists" and "antivaxers" when they are concerned about the health and welfare of their children.Several opponents of the bill were detained before the legislative session as they blocked entrances to the Capitol, including two women who briefly chained themselves to outside doorways.About 200 opponents earlier filled the hallway in front of the governor's office, asking Newsom to veto both vaccine bills. They later chanted "Where is Newsom?" and "Veto the bill" from the Senate gallery before leaving when they were threatened with being arrested for an unlawful protest.___Associated Press Writer Adam Beam contributed to this story. 3955

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California will reconsider life sentences for up to 4,000 nonviolent third-strike criminals by allowing them to seek parole under a ballot measure approved by voters two years ago, according to court documents obtained by The Associated Press on Thursday.The state will craft new regulations by January to include the repeat offenders in early release provisions. Gov. Jerry Brown also will not appeal a court ruling that the state is illegally excluding the nonviolent career criminals from parole under the 2016 ballot measure he championed to reduce the prison population and encourage rehabilitation.The state parole board estimates between 3,000 and 4,000 nonviolent third-strikers could be affected, said corrections department spokeswoman Vicky Waters, "but they would have to go through rigorous public safety screenings and a parole board hearing before any decision is made."RELATED: Ex-con, called poster?child for three-strikes law, sentenced to life in prisonIt's the second such loss for the Democratic governor, who leaves office days after the new rules are due. Another judge ruled in February that the state must consider earlier parole for potentially thousands of sex offenders. The administration is fighting that ruling, which undercuts repeated promises that Brown made to voters to exclude sex offenders from earlier release.Prosecutors are not surprised and warned throughout the Prop. 57 campaign that nonviolent third-strikers would unintentionally fall under the measure's constitutional amendment, said California District Attorneys Association spokeswoman Jennifer Jacobs."We expect the same exact thing to happen with regard to sex offenders," she said. "To fix this they're going to have to go back to the people for a vote, which can't even happen for another two years."RELATED: How some states are reducing the prison populationBrown will not appeal last month's ruling by a three-judge appellate panel in the Second Appellate District in a Los Angeles County case that third-strikers must be included under Proposition 57's constitutional amendment. It requires parole consideration for "any person convicted of a nonviolent felony offense" regardless of enhancements under California's three strikes law."There is no question that the voters who approved Proposition 57 intended (inmates) serving Three Strikes indeterminate sentences to be eligible for early parole consideration," the appeals court ruled, adding that, "There is strong evidence the voters who approved Proposition 57 sought to provide relief to nonviolent offenders."Administration lawyers said in a filing in a separate related case that the state "is not seeking review" of the appeals court decision and "is in the process of drafting new emergency regulations in compliance" with the decision by Jan. 5.RELATED: Kim Kardashian makes trip to the White House in the name of criminal justice reformMichael Romano, director of the Stanford Three Strikes Project, called the administration's decision to comply "a big deal, a huge deal."Clients potentially affected by the new decision include inmates serving life terms for stealing a bicycle, possessing less than half a gram of methamphetamine, stealing two bottles of liquor or shoplifting shampoo, he said."It's a monumental decision. It's one of the biggest decisions on sentencing policy in the Brown administration," said Romano, whose project represented third-strike inmates in several appeals.The ruling doesn't guarantee any of the offenders will get out of jail. But it allows them to go before the parole board. Romano estimates 4,000 people will be eligible for parole.Nonviolent third-strikers are disproportionately black, disproportionately mentally ill and statistically among the least likely to commit additional crimes, said Romano, who has studied the issue.He cited corrections department data on more than 2,200 nonviolent, non-serious third strikers who were paroled under a 2012 ballot measure that allowed most inmates serving life terms for relatively minor third strikes to ask courts for shorter terms. Less than 11 percent returned to prison by October 2016, the latest data available, he said, compared to nearly 45 percent for other prisoners. 4266

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

Rosie O'Donnell is getting married, a representative for the actress confirmed Tuesday to CNN.O'Donnell?publicly announced her engagement to her girlfriend, Elizabeth Rooney, on Monday evening in an interview?with People Magazine.The wedding is "a long time in the future," O'Donnell said. "We both decided that that would be best."The couple have been dating long distance since they began their relationship last year.Rooney took to Instagram Monday night to post a photo of her engagement ring with the caption, "Y E S," alongside heart and ring emoji."She lives in Boston now, and I live here in New York. It's been a long-distance thing. It's been great," O'Donnell said, adding, "I think she's a wonderful woman."O'Donnell most previously was married to Michelle Rounds, who died last year. O'Donnell has five children, Parker, 23, Blake, 18, Vivienne, 15, Chelsea, 21, and Dakota, 5. 903