山东治疗女性好的羊癫疯医院-【济南癫痫病医院】,NFauFwHg,山东癫痫医院哪家效果好,威海哪家医院癫痫专病好,山东省癫痫不治疗会好吗,山东癫痫病好的医院,滨州癫痫的常见病因有哪些,潍坊继发性癫痫有哪些症状
山东治疗女性好的羊癫疯医院潍坊儿童医院治疗小儿癫痫,日照哪家医院最能够有效治疗羊癫疯,菏泽治疗癫痫病的好医院,淄博治疗小儿癫痫疾病的费用,淄博较好的医院羊羔疯专病,滨州市哪家羊羔疯病医院好,日照治疗羊癫疯病费用高吗
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
Rudy Giuliani said Wednesday that President Donald Trump's legal team has responded to the special counsel, the latest effort in ongoing negotiations over a possible interview."We have now given him an answer. Obviously, he should take a few days to consider it, but we should get this resolved," Giuliani said during an interview on the radio show of fellow Trump attorney Jay Sekulow."We do not want to run into the November elections. So back up from that, this should be over by September 1," Giuliani said.Sekulow confirmed in a statement that the legal team "responded in writing to the latest proposal" from the special counsel, but declined to comment on the substance of the response.Giuliani had previously told CNN that the team planned to send its counteroffer to special counsel Robert Mueller regarding a potential interview on Wednesday."It is a good faith attempt to reach an agreement," Giuliani, one of Trump's lawyers on the Russia investigation, told CNN.The former New York City mayor similarly would not describe the contents of the counteroffer, except to say that "there is an area where we could agree, if they agree."Giuliani wouldn't say if that area has to do with collusion or obstruction.The President has previously said that he wants to speak with the special counsel and has insisted there was no collusion or obstruction, while deriding the investigation as a "witch hunt."But Trump's public attacks on the Russia probe have sparked questions over whether his actions could constitute obstruction of justice. Those questions intensified earlier this month when the President called on Attorney General Jeff Sessions to shut down the investigation, an escalation that Giuliani attempted to downplay as Trump merely expressing an opinion.The President's team has sought to limit any potential interview to questions about collusion. But Giuliani told CNN they would be willing to consider questions relating to any obstruction of justice inquiry as long as they are not "perjury traps," a phrase favored by the Trump legal team as a way to raise questions about the fairness of the special counsel, though it also speaks to the risks of having the President sit down for an interview."For example: 'What did you say about Flynn?' 'Why did you fire Comey?'" They already know our answer," Giuliani said, referring to former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, whom Trump abruptly fired in May 2017. The former FBI director later testified to Congress that Trump had pressed him to drop an investigation into Flynn, a claim that Trump has denied. "If they can show us something in that area that didn't involve those direct questions, that we don't consider perjury traps, we would consider it," Giuliani said, but conceded he "can't think of what that would be."Mueller has indicated to the team that the special counsel wants to ask the President obstruction questions in an interview.The President's lawyers had previously offered the special counsel written answers to obstruction questions and limiting the interview to matters before his presidential inauguration, which are largely confined to collusion.The back and forth over an interview comes as the special counsel investigation faces its first major test in court as Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort stands trial in the Eastern District of Virginia where he is accused of bank fraud, tax evasion and other financial crimes.Manafort's case isn't about the 2016 presidential campaign, but he is the first defendant Mueller's team has taken to trial. 3603
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A spokesman says one of California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s children may have been exposed to the coronavirus at school and is in quarantine. Nathan Click says the child began a 14-day quarantine after the family was told a classmate at the private school in Sacramento had tested positive for COVID-19. He says the family is following state protocols, and the governor, his wife and four children have all tested negative for the virus. Newsom said last month that his children had returned to their school, sparking criticism even as millions of public schoolchildren continue to study through distance learning. 643
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's state auditor says the California State Lottery skimped on giving million in revenue to fund public education funding and spent 0,000 on food and travel expenses without considering cheaper options. The auditor's report made public Tuesday says the lottery agency should have accounted for an increase in profits for the fiscal year that ended in June 2018 by providing million in public education financing.The auditor also recommended that the state legislature amend the Lottery Act to ensure audits of the lottery's procurement process at least once every three years.The California State Lottery says in a written response accompanying the audit that it disagrees with the auditor's findings and that the agency gives the most money it can for education.“Lottery revenues and contributions to education were declining in the years prior to the passage of AB 142. The year before this change, the Lottery’s contributions to education were approximately .05 billion. In contrast, last year the Lottery provided .8 billion–the highest contribution to date. Had the Lottery utilized CSA’s interpretation of the law, it would have had to intentionally suppress sales for certain games, resulting in fewer dollars to public education," CA Lottery wrote. “The Lottery disagrees with CSA’s underlying conclusions of the value of its Fairs and Festivals program. The Lottery must continually raise brand awareness, incentivize and persuade California adults to voluntarily purchase Lottery products to meet its mandate to provide supplemental funding to education." 1623
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- A growing number of mayors across the country support giving cash to low-income families with no restrictions on how they can spend it.It's part of a movement to establish a guaranteed minimum income to combat poverty and systemic racism.Mayors in at least 25 cities have pledged to support the effort. They are led by Michael Tubbs, the 30-year-old mayor of Stockton, California, who launched one of the country's first guaranteed income programs last year with the help of private donations.Most programs would rely on donations, but a few would mix public and private spending.RELATED STORIES:Pittsburgh becomes latest city to try guaranteed income with Twitter co-founder's moneyStimulus checks may be changing perceptions about universal basic income 790