南通颈部浅层解剖模型(广州喉结构与功能放大模型) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO (KGTV) -- As summer travel heats up, California's gas tax is rising again on July 1. The 5.6 cent increase per gallon comes as GasBuddy reports that prices in the rest of the country could fall below by the end of the year. The gas tax hike also comes amid reports of an increased number of bridges around the state in poor condition. RELATED: Newsom proposes plan to withhold gas tax funds from cities that don't meet housing requirementsSB1 was signed into law by then Governor Jerry Brown in 2017 and increased the gas tax by 12 cents per gallon and registration fees by as much as 5.In November of 2018, an effort to repeal the gas tax increase, Proposition 6, failed to pass in a statewide vote."The test of American strength is whether we defeat this stupid repeal measure which is nothing more than a Republican stunt to get a few of their losers returned to Congress," Brown said of the repeal effort at a 2018 event. Those who support the taxes say they're estimated to generate billion over a decade. 1040

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) — California may join many other states in allowing 17-year-olds to vote in primary and special elections, if they will turn 18 before the following general election, under a proposed amendment to the state constitution approved Thursday by the state Assembly.If two-thirds of senators agree, the measure would to go to voters for their consideration in California's March primary election, but it would not affect next year's elections.The measure passed, 57-13, over objections from Republican Assemblyman James Gallagher of Nicolaus that it's a ploy to lure more Democratic-leaning young voters.RELATED: California Gov. Gavin Newsom signs bill on presidential tax returnsThe measure "is being veiled as something that helps expand the franchise" but "has mostly a more political ulterior motive in the long term," Gallagher said. "That's what is really going on here."Democratic Assemblyman Kevin Mullin of San Francisco said the practice has been adopted in other states that lean Republican, and the goal of his measure is to "empower California's youngest voters" and encourage a habit of life-long voting."The time has come for California to join in pursuing what so many other states have done," Mullin said.The National Conference of State Legislatures says the practice is permitted in at least 17 states: Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia, as well as the District of Columbia. Some states that use caucuses also allow 17-year-olds to participate, though the rules are generally set by each political party."It's not driven by a Democratic idea in California," said Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego, listing some of the more conservative states. "To suggest that there's some political play going on I think is disingenuous. ... It's good for the process, it's good for them, and it's our way to develop lifelong voters."The measure is supported by groups including the League of Women Voters of California. It's opposed by the Election Integrity Project California Inc., which noted that 17-year-olds are still considered children, mostly in high school, who may be easily influenced by their parents and teachers.The measure is separate from another proposed amendment to the California constitution that would lower the voting age from 18 to 17 even in general elections. That measure is awaiting an Assembly vote.California is among 14 states that allow 16-year-olds to pre-register to vote, but they can't currently vote until they turn 18. Nine other states set different pre-registration ages.Berkeley voters in 2016 allowed 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in local school board elections, but a similar measure failed in nearby San Francisco. 2861

Roughly six percent of the male population - and less than one percent of the female population - suffer from colorblindness.It isn’t a deficiency that is debilitating, but it can be frustrating.For 11-year-old Andreas Koerber, reds and greens are mixed up, blues and purples are difficult to differentiate. The world, as he sees it, is generally more drab.The North Olmsted, Ohio sixth-grader and his family didn’t know there was a fix, until recently.Now, his eyes are open to an entirely new world after the discovery of specialized glasses.“Everything is more colorful, it’s brighter, it’s not as dark,” Andreas said.He realized he was colorblind at age five. It’s one of the biggest differences between him and his twin brother Luke. Luke is the one who had the idea to surprise Andreas with the glasses after learning about them online.“He’s my brother and really, it doesn’t feel fair that I get to see all the colors and he doesn’t,” Luke said. “I didn’t really realize how bad it was and what he wasn’t seeing.”For mom Rita Koerber, watching Andreas see colors for the first time was eye-opening.“It was just this totally special, emotional moment,” Rita said. "Kind of like Christmas when you have little kids and you’re seeing that through their eyes and they’re so excited, it was like that."The glasses run upwards of 0 and are not covered by insurance. After trying them on at Eyetique in Eton Center, Rita immediately had them special-ordered.“It’s like, how do you put a price tag on that? His face was just smiling nonstop for two days,” she said. 1595

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers are abandoning a proposal by Gov. Jerry Brown to shield electrical utilities from some financial liability for wildfires. For now.There's not enough time to settle the contentious and complex issues involved before the legislative session ends Aug. 31, Napa Democratic Sen. Bill Dodd told the San Francisco Chronicle on Saturday."It was a tough fight ... so we are pivoting," said Dodd, co-chairman of the legislative conference committee on wildfire preparedness and response.Brown's proposal would have let judges decide how much utilities pay when their equipment causes wildfires. It would have softened a legal standard that generally holds them entirely responsible for the costs of fires triggered by their power lines or other infrastructure.Current California law holds utilities responsible for damage from fires ignited by their equipment even if they have followed safety rules.Those who want to change the law fear utilities could go bankrupt or significantly raise prices for California residents as climate change makes wildfires even more severe.Lawmakers raised concerns about Brown's plan at an Aug. 9 hearing on the proposal. They said it would give utility companies too much protection without ensuring they safely maintain equipment.The issue was raised last fall when Pacific Gas and Electric Co. launched a lobbying campaign with other big utility companies to change the system.It's unlikely they'll drop their fight but they will lose a key ally in Brown, whose term ends in January. 1574

来源：资阳报