阜阳 疙瘩价格阜阳治 白斑,阜阳皮肤科医院在那里呢,阜阳皮肤病医院皮肤医院电话,刺瘊怎么去除去阜阳哪家医院好,阜阳激光去除瘊子多少钱,阜阳治痤疮费用需多少,阜阳哪个医院治湿疹

RICHMOND, Va. — Despite a recent extension of student loan relief, experts suggest borrowers should begin preparing now for repayments to begin."The best thing you can do right now is to set a plan forward for your repayment," said Andrew Pentis, who works with LendingTree. "It's possible that this moratorium could be extended by the Biden administration or the newly-elected Congress. But Biden takes office on Jan. 20 and the current moratorium is expected to end right now at Jan. 31. So that only leaves you know less than two weeks for a decision to be made on whether the moratorium will be extended."Pentis said that since March, millions of student loan borrowers have been given an administrative forbearance, which suspended payments and interest and stopped collections on all defaulted student loans. He said borrowers with government-held federal student loans did not incur penalties during the moratorium."If you have an eligible federal student loan and you're seeing any of those negative impacts such as your credit score being affected your credit report showing and delinquent account, it's best to contact your federal loan servicers," Pentis said.For borrowers struggling to afford payments, Pentis suggested they enroll in an income-driven repayment plan to lower monthly payments. "You could also pause your payments via a deferment for unemployment or other economic hardship reasons," he said.He said hoping the government will simply wipe away the more than trillion in student loan debt is not a wise option."There are billions of dollars worth of private student loans and student loans that are no longer in the hands of the federal government," he said. "So even if both major political parties got together and decided this is what they wanted to do, it's unlikely that we would see more than a trillion dollars actually went away."While Pentis says it is best to plan to restart payments at the end of January, reports surfaced on Thursday that Congress is close to striking a deal on more COVID-19 stimulus that could include more student loan relief.This story was originally published by Shelby Brown on WTVR in Richmond, Virginia. 2181

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers approved a multibillion-dollar plan Thursday to shore up the state's biggest electric utilities in the face of catastrophic wildfires and claims for damage from past blazes caused by their equipment.It requires major utilities to spend at least billion combined on safety improvements and meet new safety standards, and it creates a fund of up to billion that could help pay out claims as climate change makes wildfires across the U.S. West more frequent and more destructive.Lawmakers passed the bill less than a week after its final language went into print, and Gov. Gavin Newsom was expected to sign it Friday. Republicans and Democrats said the state needed to provide financial certainty to the state's investor-owned utilities, the largest of which, Pacific Gas & Electric Corp., is in bankruptcy.But they said their work is far from over and they plan to do more on wildfire prevention and home protection when they return in August from a summer break.A broad coalition rallied around the measure, from renewable energy trade groups and labor unions representing utility workers to survivors of recent fires caused by PG&E equipment. Victims applauded provisions they say will give them more leverage to get compensation from the company as it wades through bankruptcy.But several lawmakers raised concerns that the measure would leave utility customers on the hook for fires caused by PG&E despite questions about the company's safety record."No one has ever said this bill is going to be the silver bullet or fix all but it does take us in dramatic leaps to where we can stabilize California," said Assemblyman Chris Holden, a Democrat from Pasadena and one of the bill's authors.Holden and other supporters said the legislation would not raise electric rates for customers. But it would let utilities pass on the costs from wildfires to customers in certain cases, which would make costs rise.The legislation also extends an existing charge on consumers' electric bills to raise .5 billion for the fund that will cover costs from wildfires caused by the equipment of participating electric utilities.PG&E filed for bankruptcy in January, saying it could not afford billions in damages from recent deadly wildfires caused by downed power lines and other company equipment, including a November fire that killed 85 people and largely destroyed the town of Paradise.Credit ratings agencies also are eyeing the financial worthiness of Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric.PG&E did not take a formal position on the bill. Spokesman Lynsey Paulo said the utility is committed to resolving victims' claims and reducing wildfire risks.To use the fund, companies would have to meet new safety standards to be set by state regulators and take steps such as tying executive compensation to safety. The state's three major utilities could elect to contribute an additional .5 billion to create a larger insurance fund worth at least billion.Questions about PG&E's efforts to combat fires led to some opposition.A day before the legislation passed, a federal judge overseeing PG&E's bankruptcy ordered its lawyers to respond to a report in The Wall Street Journal that showed it knew about the risks of aging equipment but did not replace systems that could cause wildfires."It is hard not to see this bill as something of a reward for monstrous behavior. They haven't done the work. They should not be rewarded," said Assemblyman Marc Levine, a Democrat from San Rafael who voted against the legislation.David Song, a spokesman for Southern California Edison, said the utility supports the bill but wants to see "refinements." He offered no specifics."If the bills are signed into law they take initial steps to return California to a regulatory framework providing the financial stability utilities require to invest in safety and reliability," he said.___Associated Press writer Adam Beam contributed. 4026

Runners showed up on Sunday morning to race in the TCS New York City Marathon, which went ahead as planned despite last week's terror attack -- the worst in the city since September 11, 2001.On Tuesday, officials say, Sayfullo Saipov, a 29-year-old Uzbek living in New Jersey, drove a truck down a Manhattan bike path near the World Trade Center before slamming into a school bus.On Thursday, Saipov was charged with federal terrorism offenses in the attack that left eight people dead and a dozen others wounded.In the days since, city and state officials have assured attendees of Sunday's marathon that the event would be safe, and they ramped up security."You'll have thousands of officers on duty this weekend," Gov. Andrew Cuomo said in a news conference on Saturday. "But I want to stress, this is just a precautionary measure. We have no information that points to any issues."A record number of city sand trucks and New York Police Department blocker vehicles were scheduled to line the roadways to protect pedestrians, police Chief Carlos Gomez said Friday.The TCS New York City Marathon is expected to draw more than 50,000 runners, who will make their way through five boroughs while 2.5 million spectators cheer them on."I hear it's the greatest walking tour of New York with 50,000 of your best friends," said Michael Steiner, a 46-year-old from Maplewood, New Jersey, who is participating for the first time on Sunday.Steiner said he feels great, and while the event is just days after last week's attack, he's only worried about one thing."The trap," he said. "The biggest marathoner's fear is that the adrenaline gets the best of you and you run way too fast in the beginning and get killed at the end." 1748

Right now, thousands of people are without power on the Gulf Coast, and the relentless rains and remnants of what was Hurricane Sally is now soaking the Carolinas and moving northeast.In hard-hit Alabama, where the storm first struck land as a Category 2 Hurricane, debris-laced waters have taken over once-thriving neighborhoods. Swollen and rising rivers are now threatening bridges across Florida.At least two people have been killed since Sally made landfall."Citizens awoke to extensive damage and destructive property, loss of power and infrastructure and sadly even the loss of life," Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey said Thursday.One of those deaths occurred in Georgia, when Sally's heavy rains saturated the soil, triggering the collapse of a tree onto a home."Widespread river flooding is ongoing, and it could continue over the next week in different parts of Florida," Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said Thursday.Thousands of homes and businesses on the Gulf Coast are still without power, 48 hours after Sally made landfall."Power though is a major, major initiative and a priority at this point," DeSantis said. "...they do have crews here working. They are going to be working 24/7 to get the power back on."Now, officials are keeping their eyes on new threats brewing. The National Hurricane Center is currently monitoring six storms in the Atlantic. One of those systems has already developed into a major hurricane, though it isn't expected to impact the U.S. However, Tropical Depression 22 is expected to strengthen into at least a Tropical Storm in the coming days before making landfall in Texas."There are seven systems out there right now," said Greg Michel, the executive director of Mississippi Emergency Management. "One of which the system in the bay of Campeche, we could be doing this again in a few days." 1831

Rudy Giuliani's assertion to CNN this week that President Donald Trump can't be indicted by the special counsel, and thus can't face a subpoena, banks on a series of internal Justice Department policies.The question to this day is untested in the court system. Yet the step-by-step process Robert Mueller or any special counsel could follow for a President under investigation has several possible outcomes.According to several legal experts, historical memos and court filings, this is how the Justice Department's decision-making on whether to indict a sitting president could play out:First, there must be suspicion or allegations of a crime. Did the President do something criminally wrong? If the answer is no, there would be no investigation.But if the answer is maybe, that puts federal investigators on the pursuit. If they find nothing, Justice Department guidelines say they'd still need to address their investigation in a report summarizing their findings.If there could be some meat to the allegations, the Justice Department would need to determine one of two things: Did the potentially criminal actions take place unrelated to or before to the presidency? Or was the President's executive branch power was crucial in the crime?That determination will come into play later, because Congress' power to impeach and remove a president from office was intended by the framers of the Constitution to remedy abuse of the office, legal scholars say.Perhaps, though, the special counsel decides there's enough evidence to prove that the President broke the law.That's where the Office of Legal Counsel opinions come in.In 1973 and 2000, the office, which defines Justice Department internal procedure, said an indictment of a sitting president would be too disruptive to the country. This opinion appears to be binding on the Justice Department's decision-making, though it's possible for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to choose to override the opinion, give Mueller permission to ignore it and take it to court, or ask the office to reexamine the issue by writing a new opinion.This sort of legal briefing has been done before, like in the year after the 1973 opinion, when then-special prosecutor Leon Jaworski wrote a Watergate-era memo describing why the President should not be above the law.Of course, there's another immediate option if a special counsel finds the President did wrong. Prosecutors could use the "unindicted co-conspirator" approach. This would involve the special counsel's office indicting a group of conspirators, making clear the President was part of the conspiracy without bringing charges against him.At any time, in theory, a special counsel could decide to delay an indictment until the President leaves office -- so as not to interfere with the functioning of the executive branch. The other options would be to drop the case or send an impeachment referral to Congress. As evidenced by Mueller's actions previously in the investigations of Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, any steps this special counsel takes will likely come with the full support of the acting attorney general on the matter, Rosenstein.The question of whether a President could be subpoenaed is a story for another day. 3303