临沧女生一个月来两次大姨妈是什么原因(临沧下部出血) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom moved Friday to bypass environmental regulations to prepare for the next wildfire season, a move he said was necessary to prevent further loss of life even as it frustrated activists in a state viewed as a national environmental leader."The increasing wildfire risks we face as a state mean we simply can't wait until a fire starts in order to start deploying emergency resources," Newsom said in a statement ahead of declaring a state of emergency.California experienced two of its most destructive and deadly wildfire seasons in 2017 and 2018 and experts say climate change increases the risks. Newsom said clearing dead trees at a quick pace is essential to diminishing future threats. President Donald Trump has blamed California fires on poor forest management, though experts say climate change caused by people is more of a factor.Newsom is taking recommendations from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, but one environmental group likened it to actions by Trump."Gov. Newsom should reject the Trump approach of logging and rolling back critical environmental protections," said Shaye Wolf, climate science director for the Center for Biological Diversity.Newsom also pledged million for fire preparedness in low-income communities and asked the private sector to bring forward innovative proposals.The center and other environmental groups said focusing on retrofitting and creating defensible space around homes is more effective than thinning forests. Sierra Club California said clearing trees might create more danger by loosening soil that could lead to mudslides.Newsom's order will apply only to 35 projects covering nearly 141 square miles (365 square kilometers) of land, allowing state fire officials to go around multiple state regulations. They include provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, one of the nation's strictest state-level regulations. Administration officials would need to give the go ahead to each individual project and it's unclear exactly which regulations each individual project would forego.Newsom said moving through the normal process would drastically slow down the state's ability to act."Some of these projects quite literally, not figuratively, could take two years to get done, or we could get them done in the next two months," he told an audience in Lake County, the site of several massive wildfires in recent years.The union representing state firefighters praised Newsom's plan."These circumstances are unusual, unpredictable, unseen in our lifetime, and courageous decisions that sometimes go against the political winds need to be made," said Tim Edwards, president of CAL Fire Local 2881.Republican state Sen. Pat Bates also praised Newsom for acting with urgency ahead of the wildfire season."I stand ready to assist the Governor with any legislative action to eliminate bureaucratic roadblocks that could slow these projects," she said in a statement.While environmental groups bristled at Newsom's plan, they still align with him on a wide range of issues. Newsom's predecessor, fellow Democrat Jerry Brown, was known globally for his fight against climate change but still clashed with environmental groups at home on some issues.California has set a goal, for example, of getting 100 percent of its energy from carbon-free sources by 2045, and passed a landmark cap-and-trade law to decrease emissions."On the whole we see (Newsom) as an ally on environmental issues. I think what we're disagreeing with here is an approach to a problem that we all recognize," said Kathryn Phillips, director of Sierra Club California.The state's environmental laws are designed to protect California's soil stability, watershed and wildlife habitats, she said, and waiving environmental reviews could have unintended consequences."For some suspension of oversight now, what's the consequence going to be later?" she said. "Are we going to end up having huge silt floods and mudslides?"Beyond accelerating tree clearing, Newsom put out a "request for innovative ideas" from the private sector to help fight California fires. He said he wants to tap into Silicon Valley and California's spirit of creativity to come up with solutions to reduce wildfire threats. 4312

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Legislation was announced Thursday to raise the purchasing age of long guns such as rifles and shotguns from 18 to 21 in California.The legislation was introduced by Assemblymember Rob Bonta, a Democrat from Oakland.Assembly Bill 3 would mirror existing laws for purchasing handguns which state that a person must be at least 21-years-old to purchase a handgun.RELATED: Florida Senate passes bill that raises purchasing age for guns to 21“California already wisely mandates that someone be at least 21 years of age to purchase a handgun,” said Assemblymember Bonta. “It’s time to extend that common-sense law to long guns in order to enhance public safety.”"We must take every reasonable measure to protect Californians from gun violence," said Assemblymember David Chiu (D-San Francisco), Joint Author of the bill.According to a 2015 report by the FBI, adults 18 to 20 represent four percent of the population but commit 17 percent of gun homicides.“Californians under age 21 can’t purchase alcohol, tobacco and other health hazardous items,” said Senator Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), Principal Co-Author of AB 3. ”So why should they be able to buy guns? Our bill fixes that.” 1216

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- California Gov. Gavin Newsom says the state has signed a contract worth up to .4 billion with a company that will more than double the state's daily coronavirus testing capacity.Right now, California averages about 100,000 tests per day, with the state paying 0 per test and results taking between five and seven business days.Newsom said the state's new contract with Massachusetts-based PerkinElmer will increase the state's testing capacity to 250,000 per day by March 1 with each test costing about . Results would come within two days.The contract will initially cost the state 0 million, with a maximum amount of .4 billion. 678

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gov. Gavin Newsom formally apologized Tuesday for violence, mistreatment and neglect inflicted on Native Americans throughout California's history, saying it amounted to genocide and pushing the state to reckon with its dark past.The Democratic governor met with tribal leaders at the future site of the California Indian Heritage Center, where he also announced the creation of a council to examine the state's role in campaigns of extermination and exploitation.Throughout history, the California government was key to efforts to remove and kill Native Americans who lived on land that would become part of what is now the world's fifth-largest economy."Genocide. No other way to describe it, and that's the way it needs to be described in the history books," Newsom said.Joseph L. James, chairman of the Yurok Tribe, which has territory near the Northern California coast, said it is significant to hear the governor acknowledge the state's efforts to eliminate indigenous communities around the time of the Gold Rush."It was a step into healing," he said.James said he hopes the governor maintains a close relationship with tribes on a range of issues, including the protection of natural resources and prevention of wildfires.Newsom is not the first to apologize for the treatment of Native Americans.Congress tucked an apology in a 2009 military spending bill, acknowledging "years of official depredations, ill-conceived policies, and the breaking of covenants by the federal government regarding Indian tribes."Last year, then-Alaska Gov. Bill Walker issued an apology to the state's indigenous people, listing a series of wrongs.Other governors have apologized for specific episodes in history, from the killing of Arapaho and Cheyenne people in the Sand Creek Massacre of 1864 to the forced move of Potawatomi people from Indiana to Kansas in 1838 on what has become known as a trail of death.Newsom pointed to California's efforts to remove American Indians as people flooded the state searching for gold in the mid-19th century.California's first governor, Peter Burnett, declared to legislators in 1851 "that a war of extermination will continue to be waged between the two races until the Indian race becomes extinct must be expected."The Legislature subsequently approved .29 million to subsidize militia campaigns against American Indians, Newsom's office said.Like other states in the U.S. West, California has seen renewed debate about its treatment of indigenous people.Stanford University announced last year it would remove the name of Spanish missionary and Catholic saint Junipero Serra from some parts of campus following criticism over his treatment of Native Americans.And in recent years, some schools have abandoned what was once a common project in elementary classrooms around California: building models of Spanish missions, which were constructed in real life with the forced labor of Native Americans.California has the largest proportion of American Indians in the United States. About 723,000 residents identified as American Indian during the 2010 census. 3127

Rudy Giuliani just contradicted the White House and the Justice Department on a very sensitive subject: The AT&T-Time Warner deal."The president denied the merger," Giuliani, a new member of President Trump's legal team, said in an interview with HuffPost on Friday.Giuliani was seemingly trying to defend the president against any suggestion that Michael Cohen improperly influenced the administration after the revelation that Cohen, Trump's longtime personal attorney, was paid large sums of money by AT&T and several other corporate clients."Whatever lobbying was done didn't reach the president," Giuliani said, repeating a claim he made to CNN's Dana Bash on Thursday.But then Giuliani went further, telling HuffPost's S.V. Date that "he did drain the swamp... The president denied the merger. They didn't get the result they wanted."In other words: If AT&T hired Cohen to win government approval of the deal, AT&T wasted its 0,000.But the assertion that "the president denied the merger" flies in the face of everything the government has previously said about the deal."If Giuliani didn't misspeak, this is major news," former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti tweeted Friday night. "It is highly unusual for the president to be involved in DOJ merger decisions."It is possible that Giuliani misspoke, or that he simply does not know what he's talking about. He was not working for Trump at the time the Justice Department was reviewing the deal. Since he began representing Trump, he has had to change the story he has been telling in public about Stormy Daniels and what Trump knew or didn't know and when about the payment Cohen made to her. And he may simply have meant "the president" as a stand-in for "the administration."But this is not the first time that there have been questions about whether politics and Trump influenced the DOJ's decision.On the day AT&T announced its bid to buy Time Warner, the parent company of CNN, then-candidate Trump said he opposed the deal. So when he took office, there were concerns within AT&T and Time Warner that he or his aides would try to block the deal.AT&T said earlier this week that it hired Cohen, in part, to gain "insights" about the Trump administration's thinking about the deal.Throughout 2017, career officials at the Justice Department's antitrust division conducted a standard review of the proposed deal.The DOJ traditionally operates with a lot of independence. But there were persistent questions about possible political interference, especially in light of the president's well-publicized disdain for both CNN and attorney general Jeff Sessions.Still, AT&T and Time Warner executives believed the deal would receive DOJ approval, much like Comcast's acquisition of NBCUniversal did nearly a decade ago. By October, they thought the thumbs-up was right around the corner.They were wrong. In November, the DOJ went to court to block the deal, alleging that the combination of the two companies would give AT&T too much power in the marketplace.That's when questions about Trump's hidden hand really got louder. Democratic lawmakers raised alarms. So did AT&T and Time Warner. Other critics pointed out Trump's complaints about Sessions and the DOJ. Trump had recently been quoted saying "I'm not supposed to be involved in the Justice Department," adding, "I'm not supposed to be doing the kinds of things I would LOVE to be doing, and I'm very frustrated by it."But White House aides like Kellyanne Conway insisted that the White House was not interfering.The DOJ's antitrust chief, Makan Delrahim, said the same thing. He denied being influenced by Trump.In an affidavit, Delrahim said "all of my decisions" about suing to block the deal "have been made on the merits, without regard to political considerations."Ahead of the trial, AT&T and Time Warner sought discovery on any relevant communications between the White House and the Justice Department. But a judge denied the request, and the companies dropped any argument that the case was motivated by politics.The Justice Department and AT&T had no immediate comment Friday night.The-CNN-Wire 4182

来源：资阳报