濮阳东方妇科医院好挂号吗(濮阳东方医院治阳痿口碑好收费低) (今日更新中)

WASHINGTON, D.C. – One of the most contentious battles in politics isn’t just the current battle for the White House, it’s also the upcoming battle over who could ultimately end up in the halls of Congress and state capitols everywhere, in a process called redistricting.“The basic idea underlying that system is that we should form a constituency with people who live near us,” said Charles Blahous, a senior research strategist at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University in Virginia.New district maps are created based on census population numbers every 10 years. Yet, those maps can end up getting distorted to favor one political party over another when gerrymandering comes in to play.“I think gerrymandering is of concern to most voters because it seems to violate the foundational principle of our representative system, which is that we are divided into districts geographically,” Blahous said.Geography is something gerrymandering throws out the window. Some of the unusual congressional district maps can end up looking like animals.There is Maryland’s Democratic 3rd district, which looks like a snake, stretching from Baltimore into counties south. There is also northern Ohio’s Republican 4th district, known as “the duck.”So, who designed these?“The Constitution gives the power to state legislatures to draw these maps,” Blahous said.Since politicians draw the maps, they can be skewed to favor a particular party or incumbent. However, they can also be used to favor people from a particular racial or ethnic group, who have often been under-represented in the halls of power, in order to comply with federal Voting Rights Act rules on representation.Still, there are now efforts to take the map drawing out of the hands of politicians.In Virginia, voters will decide this November whether an independent commission should be in charge of the process instead. There are other ideas emerging, too: like using artificial intelligence to make the maps.“It takes an enormous computer capacity, which was not there 30 years ago, and writing the programming to make that all happen is also not a trivial matter,” said political science professor Bruce Cain, director of the Bill Lane Center for the American West at Stanford University.Prof. Cain said he and a colleague, Prof. Wendy Tam Cho of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, believe an algorithm they’ve developed might be the best alternative for making fairer maps.“What you want to be able to do is take every plan and classify it and say, ‘yeah, this one's better for minorities, this one's better for compactness,’ but is there something that combines both of them?” he said.It is all part of the ongoing effort to make sure America’s representative democracy remains truly representative of the people. 2801

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Two conservative Supreme Court justices are taking aim at the landmark case that legalized same-sex marriage across the U.S. in 2015.Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito released a four-page opinion Monday about the religious liberty implications from the Obergefell v. Hodges decision.Thomas and Alito argue that the decision threatens the religious liberty of Americans who believe that marriage is a “sacred institution” between a man and woman.“Due to Obergefell, those with sincerely held religious beliefs concerning marriage will find it increasingly difficult to participate in society without running afoul of Obergefell and its effect on other antidiscrimination laws,” wrote the justices.Thomas and Alito were among the four justices who voted against legalizing same-sex marriage five years ago, arguing that it should have been left to the states to the decide.“If the states had been allowed to resolve this question through legislation, they could have included accommodations for those who hold these religious beliefs,” they wrote.Monday’s opinion came as the court declined to hear the case involving Kentucky clerk Kim Davis, who made headlines in 2015 as she declined marriage licenses to gay couples, despite the Supreme Court ruling. Thomas wrote that he agreed with not taking up the case, because it didn’t “cleanly present” important questions raised about Obergefell v. Hodges.In their opinion, Thomas and Alito say Davis may have been “one of the first victims” of the court’s “cavalier treatment of religion” in the Obergefell decision, but she won’t be the last.They claim, “Obergefell enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss.”Thomas and Alito ended the opinion saying the court’s decision in the Obergefell case has “created a problem that only it can fix,” suggesting there’s a possibility the justices could move to overturn the 2015 decision.This comes weeks after the death of liberal justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans are working hard to appoint Judge Amy Coney Barrett to that seat, which would give conservatives a 6-3 majority. 2300

We may not know if an extraterrestrial or earthling installed the “monolith” structure, but we can confirm that it has been taken by an unknown party or parties. More: https://t.co/zmlHF4kPn9 #monolith #utahmonolith #utah pic.twitter.com/TiQMHK9cyM— BLM Utah (@BLMUtah) November 30, 2020 296

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House has approved legislation that would reverse recent changes in U.S. Postal Service operations. The measure would also send billion in emergency funds to shore up the agency ahead of November's presidential election. Passage was 257 to 150 and came after heated debate. President Donald Trump had urged a no vote, calling concerns over mail delivery a “hoax," and the White House says he will veto the bill if it passes the GOP-led Senate. More than two dozen Republicans broke with the president and backed the legislation. 562

WASHINGTON, D.C. — It’s easily one of the most visible of the celestial bodies: the moon. Next year, the journey to get humans back there will get underway again.“Ultimately, it fulfills our need to explore,” said Dr. Kjell Lindgren, a NASA astronaut, who is one of the 18 recently chosen for NASA’s Artemis program.Artemis aims to get humans, including the first woman, to the lunar surface by 2024. Humans have not been back to the moon since the Apollo 17 mission back in 1972.“All of us in the astronaut office are, in one way or another, influenced by those iconic images of our Apollo astronauts exploring the moon,” Dr. Lindgren said.Returning to the moon is seen as a necessary stepping-stone to getting humans to Mars in the 2030s. The Artemis team will be working on lunar-related projects, both in orbit and on the surface of the moon, that can eventually be applied to a future Martian mission.“The moon offers a wealth of scientific discovery still,” Dr. Lindgren said. “It also offers a wealth of operational discovery helping us to refine the procedures the equipment and the skills that are needed to be able to land, to explore successfully on a rocky surface and then to come back to the earth.”The missions also have the potential to create technological advancements for everyone on Earth.“The whole world benefits from those things and the benefits from Apollo are innumerable. You know, from the computers, the miniaturization of computers and on, you can count all those,” he said. “That was really a turning point in history for technology.”NASA’s Artemis program hopes to eventually create a permanent human presence on the moon’s surface, similar to the current full-time human presence on the International Space Station, and Dr. Lindgren could be among them.“It's such a privilege to be a part of this,” he said.The new lunar program was named “Artemis,” after the Greek goddess, who was the twin sister of Apollo. 1950

来源：资阳报