梅州妇科盆腔炎需要治疗吗-【梅州曙光医院】,梅州曙光医院,梅州什么时间做流产手术合适,梅州蝴蝶臂怎么减,梅州好的人流医院,梅州宫颈糜烂人流总共多少钱,梅州治急性盆腔炎的费用,梅州急性盆腔炎的预防
梅州妇科盆腔炎需要治疗吗梅州月经调检查要多少钱,梅州内眼角的手术,梅州打胎什么时间做才合适,梅州妇科病qq咨询,梅州怀孕多久做人流,梅州减压流产多少钱,梅州慢性盆腔炎的治疗费用
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A staunchly conservative political party in deep-blue California will get to keep its name after the governor vetoed a bill aimed at banning what state lawmakers say are misleading monikers.Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Wednesday he had vetoed a bill that would have banned political parties from using "no party preference," ''decline to state" or "independent" in their official names.The bill would have applied to all political parties. But it was aimed at the American Independent Party, which has been an option for California voters since 1968.More California voters are registering with no party preference, now accounting for 28.3% of all registered voters. If "no party preference" were a political party, it would be the second largest in the state behind the Democrats.Critics say the American Independent Party has benefited from this trend because its name confuses voters into believing they are registering as independents. The party makes up 2.59% of California's registered voters, making it the third largest political party in the state after the Democratic Party at 43.1% and the Republican Party at 23.6%.In 2016, the Los Angeles Times surveyed the party's registered members and found most did not know they had registered to vote with the party. But Newsom said he vetoed the bill because he worried it was unconstitutional."By requiring one existing political party to change its current name, this bill could be interpreted as a violation of the rights of free speech and association guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution," Newsom wrote in his veto message.Representatives for the American Independent Party did not respond to an email and phone call seeking comment. The party's website says it nominated Donald Trump for president in 2016 and "God willing, 2020."Democratic Sen. Tom Umberg, the bill's author, warned the mistaken registration could have electoral consequences. People registered with another political party would not be allowed to vote in the state's pivotal Democratic presidential primary in March.But Newsom signed another bill by Umberg that could help people rectify any registration mistakes. The law, signed Tuesday, allows voters to register to vote or update their registration at all polling places on election day.If people show up to vote in the Democratic presidential primary and are ineligible because they are registered with the American Independent Party, they can change their registration on the spot and cast a ballot. The ballot would be conditional, meaning it would not be counted until after the person's registration could be verified. 2676
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) — Pacific Gas & Electric's key lenders on Tuesday offered a billion plan to pull the utility out of bankruptcy and give the tarnished company a new name.The proposal filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court would set aside up to billion of that billion to pay claims on the 2017 and 2018 wildfires caused by PG&E equipment, the Sacramento Bee reported.The plan offered by PG&E's leading bondholders would compete with an alternative that the newspaper says is being drafted by PG&E. Normally the company in bankruptcy has first crack at proposing an exit plan, but the bondholders said in a court filing that they filed their plan because PG&E has "wasted crucial time needlessly."The bondholders also want to rebrand PG&E as Golden State Power Light & Gas Company.Asked about the bondholders' plan, the utility said in a statement that it was considering all options as it navigates the bankruptcy process.The new proposal came four days after Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, floated the idea of a billion package to deal with the costs of future wildfires, paid for by ratepayers and shareholders of PG&E and the other two big electric utilities in California.Newsom's plan does not offer any cash for PG&E's existing liabilities but would revise state law to give utilities more certainty about recovering costs from ratepayers — enough stability that Newsom believes will allow PG&E to borrow the money it needs to pay existing claims, according to the Bee.The bondholders include some of the biggest investors on Wall Street, including Elliott Management, Pimco and Apollo Global Management. They have been quietly promoting a PG&E restructuring plan for weeks in conversations with legislators, Newsom's aides and others. Tuesday's court filing marks the first time they have taken the proposal public."Substantial new capital must be infused into the company," the bondholders said in their court filing.The governor's office had no immediate comment on the bondholders' proposal.Like Newsom's plan, the proposal is "ratepayer neutral" — meaning, customer rates would not go up to pay the costs of getting PG&E out of bankruptcy.But ratepayers would pay: The plan calls for a .50 monthly charge, a feature of PG&E bills since the 2001 energy crisis, to be extended for several years to help raise dollars for a wildfire insurance fund proposed by Newsom last week. That fund would help pay claims for future fires.___Information from: The Sacramento Bee, http://www.sacbee.com 2574
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California is looking to tighten the rules about children under 13 using social media.The state Senate voted 31-4 on Thursday to require social media companies to first get the consent of a parent or guardian before creating an account for a child the company knows is under 13.Federal law already requires social media companies to get parental consent before collecting or selling data of children under 13. That's why most social media companies, including Facebook, already ban children under 13 from creating accounts.Democratic Sen. Henry Stern says the bill will protect children. But Democratic Sen. Scott Wiener says the bill would harm LGBT youth who live in abusive households by isolating them from others like them.The bill now heads to the state Assembly. 803
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- A California prosecutor says someone has filed an unemployment claim in the name of convicted murderer Scott Peterson.Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert said it is one of at least 35,000 unemployment claims made on behalf of prison inmates between March and August.Schubert said the state has paid out at least 0 million in benefits.At least 158 claims have been filed for 133 inmates on death row.Schubert called it perhaps the biggest fraud of taxpayer dollars in California history.Prosecutors say the scam involves people outside of prison filing claims on behalf of the inmates. 642