多少天做无痛药流昌吉(昌吉男科找哪家好) (今日更新中)

(KGTV) — Is Democratic Gubernatorial candidate Gavin Newsom avoiding the debate stage? That's the accusation from Republican rival John Cox who says Newsom has agreed to only one debate thus far, despite several opportunities being offered.Newsom tells 10News he has already been part of four debates with Cox but critics point out that was during the primary campaign with other candidates sharing the stage.Newsom tells 10News he prefers meeting with people at town halls where there's more time for interaction with the audience and less grandstanding.RELATED: Gavin Newsom, John Cox to face off in November General Election"Candidly, the last three out of four of our debates, looked like Jerry Springer shows than substantive dialogue," said Newsom. But political analyst Kevin Riggs says its no surprise Newsom is shying away from debates at this point in the race."He's ahead in the polls, he's ahead in the fundraising, at this point his campaign is an exercise in risk management," said Riggs. "His campaign is going to look at this invitation and say, 'What's in it for us?' and the answer is, not much."Riggs says every time Newsom puts himself side by side with Cox, he raises his opponent's profile and gives him a chance to gain ground."Cox needs the exposure," said Riggs, "He needs to be on the same stage with Gavin Newsom."Which is why, says Riggs, the Cox campaign has agreed to multiple debate offers, while Newsom has so far declined or not responded to all but the one offer from CNN.So what can Cox do about it?  Riggs says, "If you're John Cox you try and shame your opponent and try and talk about the fact you are ignoring voters, you're snubbing voters." The Cox campaign did release a statement this week, accusing Newsom of just that, saying he doesn't want to talk about the issues Californians care about. The two are set to meet for the first — perhaps only — one-on-one debate Oct. 1 on CNN. 1967

.@CALFIRESANDIEGO is at scene of Donovan Prison for an event involving multiple patients. Significant augmentation of resources. #DonovanIC— CAL FIRE/SAN DIEGO COUNTY FIRE (@CALFIRESANDIEGO) August 24, 2019 220

(KGTV) - Has there really been a rash of Facebook accounts being cloned?No.The message being virally sent around warning people about a second friend request being received is bogus and should be ignored. 217

(KGTV) - The state Supreme Court started hearing oral arguments Tuesday in San Francisco over San Diego’s pension changes that were approved by voters six years ago.More than 65 percent of San Diegans voted for Proposition B, the "Citizens Pension Reform Initiative" which switched most new city workers to a 401(k) plan instead of a guaranteed pension.Ever since then the measure has been challenged by labor unions. The Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) has been trying to overturn the pension cutbacks in court and now it’s in front of the state Supreme Court.The court will review the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s 2017 ruling on the issue.The focus then was on whether former San Diego city leaders illegally put Prop B on the ballot because they did not meet and confer with the labor union first. The appellate court ruled in favor of the city then.Now, political analyst John Dadian says if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the labor union, the city could be upside-down millions of dollars, directly impacting taxpayers.“Taxpayers should be very scared,” said Dadian.  “They could have to go back and retroactively give the original pension benefits to the new 3,000 employees and that would be horrendous.”Dadian says there is still hope for the city if the court rules in favor of the union.“If it rules against the city they have several options, they could craft a new one (prop) to go back on the ballot and it could possibly go to federal court,” said Dadian.After Tuesday’s hearing, the court has 90 days to make a ruling. 1575

A big move that could impact what you pay for healthcare in California, but a new bill is already drawing intense opposition from physicians, hospitals, and other health care providers.One California lawmaker is offering a solution—an across the board price cap set by the state.This latest effort to wrangle in skyrocketing costs comes from Assemblyman Ash Kalra (D-San Jose).“The average San Diegan, the average Californian, is not going to put up with the status quo anymore,” Kalra said.He wants to create a commission to set prices on medical services-- with rates similar to Medicare. “Right now, we don't have an open process at all. It's being done privately. It's being set by the private sector and we all pay for it.”SEIU is one of the labor unions backing his plan. The local leader in San Diego says every day, many of his members must make costly decisions. “Am I going to go the hospital and pay that huge co-pay or pay for those prescriptions or do I put groceries on the table?” said SEIU President David Garcias.But opponents argue there is a big downside. “It's not cost of care they're lowering. It's the payment for care that they're lowering,” Dr. Ted Mazer, President of California Medical Association. “The costs still go up.”Mazer is leading the charge against this measure. He says the plan will drive doctors out of the state or encourage them to retire. “ [They’re] in essence saying, it doesn't matter what it costs you to serve the patient, this is all you're going to get. That does not drive the cost curve down, it drives doctors out.”It’s a quick fix he says that could cost you more in the long run. “You're looking at a state that's already facing a shortage of physicians,” Mazer said.Supporters site a New York Times article that says Americans pay up to 20 times as much as people in other countries for the same medical treatments.That's the problem they hope to solve with doctors at the table. “If they're not part of helping us come up with a solution to this, this unsustainable healthcare system is going to take all of us down,” Kalra said.California has seen a similar plan in the past. Back in 2014, voters overwhelmingly struck down a ballot initiative that would have given the state insurance commissioner power to block excessive rate hikes. 2301

来源：资阳报