濮阳东方预约电话(濮阳市东方医院预约挂号) (今日更新中)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Postmaster General Louis DeJoy told lawmakers Monday that he has warned allies of President Donald Trump that the president’s repeated attacks on mail-in ballots are “not helpful,” but denied that recent changes at the Postal Service are linked to the November elections.“I am not engaged in sabotaging the election,” DeJoy said, adding that, like Trump, he personally plans to vote by mail.The House hearing quickly became a debate over mail delivery disruptions being reported nationwide. Democrats said the changes under DeJoy’s watch are causing widespread delays, but Republicans dismissed the worries as unfounded and part of a Democratic “conspiracy” against Trump.DeJoy made clear his role in changes that have recently been reported at the USPS.“As part of this conversation, there are many inaccuracies about my actions that I wish to again correct. First, I did not direct the removal of blue collection boxes or the removal of mail processing equipment. Second, I did not direct the cut back on hours at any of our post offices. Finally, I did not direct the elimination or any cutback in overtime. I did however suspend these practices, to remove any misperceptions about our commitment to delivering the nation’s election mail,” DeJoy stated in his opening remarks.During questioning, DeJoy clarified that his changes were intended to get the trucks to run on time, as a fundamental change needed for the whole process to be more efficient.“If the trucks don’t run on time, the mail carriers can’t leave on time,” DeJoy said, defending the change, explaining that late trucks lead to overtime and late night deliveries.A story from NewsChannel 5 found that this policy change is leading to empty mail trucks leaving without its intended cargo in order to leave on time.A heated exchange happened during Monday’s hearing, when Representative Stephen Lynch asked DeJoy if he would put mail sorting machines back, reportedly removed earlier this summer, before the election.“Will you put the machines back?” Representative Lynch pressed multiple times, reaching a shouting level.“No, I will not,” DeJoy repeatedly answered.DeJoy has argued the machines were planned to be removed as part of a transition to more package-handling equipment since the post office is handling fewer letters.A little later, during questioning from Representative Ro Khanna, DeJoy seemed to indicate he may put the machines back. Rep. Khanna asked how much money it would take to put the machines back, if the appearance of doing so helped Americans feel confident about voting and sending mail. He asked if it would take a billion dollars.DeJoy responded that Congress “couldn’t get the money,” referencing stalled efforts to pass bipartisan legislation, and the history of not funding the postal service.However, when pressed by Rep. Khanna, DeJoy responded, “Get me a billion (dollars) and I’ll put the machines in.”During the questioning, DeJoy stated he was “surprised by the lack of attention paid to the postal service in the last decade,” referencing comments from a handful of representatives that the postal service has struggled financially for years.The Postmaster General says the postal service is funded through late 2021 without new funding approved by Congress.The House Oversight Committee held a hearing on Monday on operational changes at the Postal Service that have resulted in mail delays across the country, as well as to look into concerns about the process DeJoy became the postmaster general.DeJoy testified before a Senate committee on Friday, answering similar questions.Acknowledging an expected surge in mail-in ballots because of the coronavirus pandemic, DeJoy said Monday voters should request mail-in ballots at least 15 days before the Nov. 3 election to ensure they have enough time to receive their ballot, complete it and mail it back to elections officials on time.The House approved legislation Saturday to reverse the changes and send billion to shore up the agency ahead of the election.In a statement Sunday, the Postal Service said it greatly appreciates House efforts to assist the agency, but remains concerned that some of the bill’s requirements, “while well meaning, will constrain the ability of the Postal Service to make operational changes that will improve efficiency, reduce costs and ultimately improve service to the American people.″ 4411

Walmart said they would stop selling "All Lives Matter" merchandise after customers and employees raised concerns about the products.RELATED: Walmart facing backlash for selling 'All Lives Matter' t-shirt 212

Walmart employees could soon be getting a little more wiggle room in their work attire.The discount giant is testing a new dress code that would allow workers to wear any solid colored shirt and adds blue to the mix of approved pants colors, making blue jeans work-appropriate attire, a spokesperson said."We are always testing new ideas and concepts in a small number of our stores," spokesperson Justin Rushing said in an emailed statement "Some of these tests are expanded while others are retired. We won't know next steps on this test until we've had a chance to learn what works and what could work better."The news was reported earlier by Bloomberg. The site reported about two dozen Walmart locations will test the new clothing policy.Walmart employees at stores not included in the pilot will have to continue to abide by the old dress code, which bans blue jeans and stipulates khaki or black pants with a solid white or blue top.One new dress rule, however, will be nationwide: Beginning April 14, new hires cannot have visible face tattoos, according to CBS News.With 4,900 US stores, Walmart is the country's largest employer. About 1.5 million people are employed by the grocery and home goods giant. 1232

Video of the explosion at Beirut port caught from the sea#??????_????? pic.twitter.com/ddDZQfBgzp— Mohammad Hijazi (@mhijazi) August 4, 2020 148

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that the Trump administration endangered public health by keeping a widely used pesticide on the market despite extensive scientific evidence that even tiny levels of exposure can harm babies' brains.The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to remove chlorpyrifos from sale in the United States within 60 days.A coalition of farmworkers and environmental groups sued last year after then-EPA chief Scott Pruitt reversed an Obama-era effort to ban chlorpyrifos, which is widely sprayed on citrus fruit, apples and other crops. The attorneys general for several states joined the case against EPA, including California, New York and Massachusetts.RELATED: EPA Chief Scott Pruitt quits amid ethics scandalsIn a split decision, the court said Thursday that Pruitt, a Republican forced to resign earlier this summer amid ethics scandals, violated federal law by ignoring the conclusions of agency scientists that chlorpyrifos is harmful."The panel held that there was no justification for the EPA's decision in its 2017 order to maintain a tolerance for chlorpyrifos in the face of scientific evidence that its residue on food causes neurodevelopmental damage to children," Judge Jed S. Rakoff wrote in the court's opinion.Michael Abboud, spokesman for acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler, said the agency was reviewing the decision, but it had been unable to "fully evaluate the pesticide using the best available, transparent science."RELATED: Trump administration wants to lower emissions standards for carsEPA could potentially appeal to the Supreme Court since one member of the three-judge panel dissented from the majority ruling.Environmental groups and public health advocates celebrated the court's action as a major success."Some things are too sacred to play politics with, and our kids top the list," said Erik Olson, senior director of health and food at the Natural Resources Defense Council. "The court has made it clear that children's health must come before powerful polluters. This is a victory for parents everywhere who want to feed their kids fruits and veggies without fear it's harming their brains or poisoning communities."The attorneys general of California and New York also claimed victory.RELATED: EPA Pushes Back Against Asbestos Comeback Claims"This is one more example of how then-EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt skirted the law and endangered the health of our children — in this case, all because he refused to curb pesticide levels found in food," Attorney General Xavier Becerra of California said in a statement.Chlorpyrifos was created by Dow Chemical Co. in the 1960s. It remains among the most widely used agricultural pesticides in the United States, with the chemical giant selling about 5 million pounds domestically each year through its subsidiary Dow AgroSciences.Dow did not respond to an email seeking comment. In past statements, the company has contended the chemical helps American farmers feed the world "with full respect for human health and the environment."Chlorpyrifos belongs to a family of organophosphate pesticides that are chemically similar to a chemical warfare agent developed by Nazi Germany before World War II.As a result of its wide use as a pesticide over the past four decades, traces of chlorpyrifos are commonly found in sources of drinking water. A 2012 study at the University of California at Berkeley found that 87 percent of umbilical-cord blood samples tested from newborn babies contained detectable levels of the pesticide.Under pressure from federal regulators, Dow voluntarily withdrew chlorpyrifos for use as a home insecticide in 2000. EPA also placed "no-spray" buffer zones around sensitive sites, such as schools, in 2012.In October 2015, the Obama administration proposed banning the pesticide's use on food. A risk assessment memo issued by nine EPA scientists concluded: "There is a breadth of information available on the potential adverse neurodevelopmental effects in infants and children as a result of prenatal exposure to chlorpyrifos."Federal law requires EPA to ensure that pesticides used on food in the United States are safe for human consumption — especially children, who are typically far more sensitive to the negative effects of poisons.Shortly after his appointment by President Donald Trump in 2017, Pruitt announced he was reversing the Obama administration effort to ban chlorpyrifos, adopting Dow's position that the science showing chlorpyrifos is harmful was inconclusive and flawed.The Associated Press reported in June 2017 that Pruitt announced his agency's reversal on chlorpyrifos just 20 days after his official schedule showed a meeting with Dow CEO Andrew Liveris. At the time, Liveris headed a White House manufacturing working group, and his company had written a million check to help underwrite Trump's inaugural festivities.Following AP's report, then-EPA spokeswoman Liz Bowman said that March 9, 2017, meeting on Pruitt's schedule never happened. Bowman said the two men had instead shared only a "brief introduction in passing" while attending the same industry conference at a Houston hotel and that they never discussed chlorpyrifos.However, internal EPA emails released earlier this year following a public records lawsuit filed by The Sierra Club suggest the two men shared more than a quick handshake.Little more than a week after the conference and before Pruitt announced his decision, the EPA chief's scheduler reached out to Liveris' executive assistant to schedule a follow-up meeting."Hope this email finds you well!" wrote Sydney Hupp, Pruitt's assistant, on March 20, 2017. "I am reaching out today about setting up a meeting to continue the discussion between Dow Chemical and Administrator Scott Pruitt. My apologies for the delay in getting this email into you — it has been a crazy time over here!"Subsequent emails show Hupp and Liveris' office discussing several potential dates that the Dow CEO might come to Pruitt's office at EPA headquarters, but it is not clear from the documents whether the two men ever linked up.Liveris announced his retirement from Dow in March of this year.Pruitt resigned July 6 amid more than a dozen ethics investigations focused on such issues as outsized security spending, first-class flights and a sweetheart condo lease for a Capitol Hill condo linked to an energy lobbyist.Bowman, who left EPA in May to work for GOP Sen. Joni Ernest of Iowa, declined to comment on her earlier characterization of the March 2017 interaction between Pruitt and Liveris or what "discussion" the internal email was referring to."I don't work for EPA anymore," Bowman said.___Follow Associated Press investigative reporter Michael Biesecker at http://twitter.com/mbieseck 6863

来源：资阳报