梅州白带多稀是怎么回事梅州女性附件炎治疗的医院,梅州微创可视无痛人流,梅州流产术注意事项,梅州割扇形双眼皮,梅州子宫附件炎怎么办,梅州做个人流大概花多少钱,梅州腰疼月经来怎么办

The Trump administration took another whack at the Affordable Care Act on Wednesday.Officials unveiled a final rule that will make it easier to obtain coverage through short-term health insurance plans, which don't have to adhere to the law's consumer protections.The move would reverse an Obama administration decision to limit the duration of short-term plans to no more than 90 days in order to make them less attractive. Insurers will soon be allowed to sell these policies for just under a year. They can be renewed for up to 36 months, though that renewal isn't guaranteed. 587

The task is painstaking and painful.A searcher is given the name of someone who is missing and an address. The list of names goes on and on.At least 1,300 people are unaccounted for since the Camp Fire erupted 10 days ago, killing 76 people and becoming the deadliest and most destructive fire in California history.Search teams are combing properties where all evidence of life has been wiped out by flames. Many of the searchers are from the devastated areas and have lost their own homes. They are looking for the remains of their neighbors in the ruins."It is overwhelming, I don't have any word to describe it," Butte County Sheriff and Coroner Kory Honea said. "This is unprecedented. No one has had to deal with this magnitude that caused so much destruction and regrettably so much death."The Camp Fire has destroyed more than 9,800 homes and scorched 149,000 acres since it started November 8. It was 55% contained as of early Sunday.Meanwhile, three deaths have been reported in the Woolsey Fire in Southern California, bringing the statewide death toll from the wildfires to 79. 1097

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to weigh in on the battle over pension reform in the city of San Diego. The decision leaves in place a California Supreme Court decision from last year that called pension reform into question and required a lower court to come up with a remedy. It could end up costing the city billions. In 2012, San Diego voters approved Proposition B with 65 percent in-favor. The measure ended pensions for nearly all new city hires, instead switching them to 401(k) type plans. Around the time, the city faced a billion pension liability, comprising 20 percent of the budget. "It is saving us, literally, hundreds of millions of dollars," Mayor Kevin Faulconer said Monday. "That's why it's important, so we can invest dollars back into neighborhoods."The city, however, is now on the legal defensive. Back in 2012, then-mayor Jerry Sanders campaigned on behalf of the measure. Labor unions argued Sanders' involvement required the city to meet and confer with unions before changing their terms of employment. The city argued that Sanders was exercising his First Amendment right to endorse the measure, which got to the ballot via a citizens initiative. The state Public Employee Retirement Board sided with the unions. So did the California Supreme Court, which last year ordered lower courts to decide a remedy. "There is not even a breath of a suggestion in this case that any public officials First Amendment rights have been violated," said Ann Smith, the attorney representing the labor unions. In a statement, Sanders, who now heads the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce, called the Supreme Court's decision disappointing but not unexpected. Smith said a lower court decision could make a decision within 30 days. It could impact as many as 4,000 city employees. 1813

The Republican mayor of a Kansas town resigned on Tuesday saying that she "no longer felt safe" in the position due to threats she received while attempting to institute a mask mandate.Dodge City Mayor Joyce Warshaw submitted a letter informing the city of her immediate resignation on Tuesday, according to the city's website.According to the Washington Post, Warshaw was thrust into the national spotlight last Friday, when USA Today published a feature story on Dodge City's struggle to contain COVID-19. According to the article, 1 in 10 people in the town of 27,000 had contracted the virus by the time Warshaw instituted the mask mandate on Nov. 16.Though at least a dozen people in the small town had died, USA Today reported that the local police department chose not to enforce the mandate and that few in the city were actually complying with the order.But Warshaw says that Dodge City's defiance went beyond ignoring the rules. She told the Washington Post on Tuesday that threats toward her and her family prompted her resignation."They were loud, and they were aggressive, and they frightened me and my family," Warshaw told the Post. "There's a strong part of me that wants to say they are only words. But people are angry right now, and I don't know that for sure."Warshaw said she received numerous anonymous voicemails from angry constituents."...the messages grew more frequent and aggressive," the Post reported. "Burn in hell. Get murdered. One person simply wrote, 'We're coming for you.'"Warshaw, who was serving in her second stint as the town's mayor, said in her resignation letter that it was the threats that led to her stepping down."Life has dealt out many challenges in our world that have perhaps caused many people to act inappropriately but I do not feel safe in this position anymore and am hopeful in removing myself this anger, accusations and abuse will not fall on anyone else and will calm down," she wrote.Warshaw isn't the first public official to resign amid threats during the COVID-19 pandemic. In June, Ohio Department of Health Director Dr. Amy Acton submitted her resignation after leading the state's fight against the virus for several months.While Acton stated in her resignation letter that she was seeking to spend more time with her family, she regularly received threats from Ohioans angered by public health measures she took to prevent the spread of the virus. Protesters even accosted Acton at her home.In September, hours after Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine named Dr. Joan Duwve as Acton's replacement, Duwve removed herself from consideration for "personal reasons." 2625

The Supreme Court granted Tuesday a Trump administration request to continue to bar most refugees under its travel ban.Without comment, the court blocked a federal appeals court ruling from last week that would have exempted refugees who have a contractual commitment from resettlement organizations from the travel ban while the justices consider its legality. The ruling could impact roughly 24,000 people.The travel ban bars certain people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering the US.The issue concerning the scope of the travel ban has been ricocheting through the courts since the spring when the Supreme Court allowed Trump's ban to go into effect except for those with a "bona fide" relationship to the United States. The order might give hope to supporters of the ban, but it may also simply reflect a desire on the part of the justices to maintain the status quo until the justices can hear the case next month."Although it may be tempting to see the order as a harbinger of how the court is likely to rule on the merits, it's better understood as a very modest procedural step to stabilize the full scope of the injunctions against the travel ban over the next four weeks," said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor of law at the University of Texas School of Law.The justices did not explain their reasoning, although it took five justices to make the decision.The court is expected to take up the legality of the travel ban October 10. 1500