濮阳东方医院男科医生电话(濮阳东方医院妇科做人流价格正规) (今日更新中)

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

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers on Tuesday advanced a bill that would let legislative leaders raise and spend more money to help their preferred candidates.Their vote came despite opposition from open-government groups who argued the bill would spur more pay-to-play politics at the Capitol.The bill would let leaders in the Legislature operate fundraising committees governed like state and county party committees. Such committees have higher contribution limits than regular campaigns and can give unlimited amounts to help state candidates.Senators voted 3-2 to advance the bill out of a committee.Lawmakers supporting the proposal argue it would help them combat the influence of independent expenditures. They also argue the bill would increase transparency by requiring more frequent disclosures by party and legislative leadership committees. 873

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom heaped praise on legislators as he revealed his updated 3 billion budget last week.The Democrat who is five months into the job applauded Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon's focus on universal preschool. He called Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Holly Mitchell the champion of increasing grants for low-income families.He even thanked several Republicans, including Assemblyman James Gallagher, who has sought assistance for the city of Paradise that he represents and mostly was destroyed by a wildfire last year.All that goodwill is about to be tested as Newsom and the Legislature enter the final weeks of budget negotiations. Lawmakers must pass a spending plan by June 15 or lose pay, then Newsom has until June 30 to sign it.His proposal released Thursday carries many of the Democrat-dominated Legislature's priorities: more spending aimed at children and the poor, a health care expansion for young people living in the country illegally and the elimination of sales tax on diapers and tampons."It's clear that he has heard from Californians quite frankly, not just us as policy makers, who need their state government to step up and invest in them," Mitchell said.But he also gave the same warnings as his predecessor, Jerry Brown, that the state's strong economy — and the huge budget surpluses it's creating — won't last forever.Newsom has allocated billion to pad state reserves and pay down debt and put cutoff dates on key proposals that Democratic legislators want to make permanent. He also wants lawmakers to take politically painful votes such as putting a tax on water."It's a great starting point," Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego said of Newsom's plan.Her comment neatly encapsulates the situation for many progressive Democrats; they like much of what Newsom is saying but don't necessarily see his plans as an end point.Gonzalez, for example, has pushed for eliminating sales tax on diapers for at least five years. Newsom's proposal ends the cut in 2022.Newsom said he imposed a cut-off in case revenue isn't as robust in future budget years. A so-called sunset provision can make it easier to win support from lawmakers, Gonzalez noted, because the tax break can go away in future years without lawmakers having to take a painful vote to cut it.During budget talks she said she will up the ante and push for permanent revocation of the sales tax on diapers.Newsom isn't giving many clues to lawmakers about which items on his wish-list are the top priorities saying he's done enough negotiations to be cautious about showing his hand."Everything I said matters to me, or I wouldn't have said it," he said. "I'm using the budget in ways to advance things I care deeply about."Assembly Budget Chairman Phil Ting said he hasn't had a conversation with Newsom about priorities. Ting, who worked as San Francisco's assessor when Newsom was mayor, said he wasn't surprised Newsom isn't showing his hand."That sounds exactly like him," Ting said.Ting said overall he was pleased with Newsom's budget proposal, but highlighted some concerns, notably that many of Newsom's biggest spending increases are also slated to expire in two years.Beyond the diaper tax, that includes big commitments to increase rates for providers of Medi-Cal, the state's health program for poor children and adults, along with expanded preschool slots and more services for people with development disabilities.Newsom has proposed several new taxes and fees that would pay for things such as bolstering the state's 911 emergency services and clean up contaminated drinking water in the Central Valley. Those ideas require a two-thirds vote of the legislature, which Ting said will be hard even though Democrats have super-majorities in both chambers."It's not clear where the votes are for all of that," Ting said.Newsom's budget also relies on conforming California's tax law with federal changes pushed by Republican President Donald Trump. Additional revenue it generates will go toward a major expansion of a tax credit for working families. The tax change similarly requires a two-thirds vote.Asked how he'd convince lawmakers to take those votes, Newsom said: "Vote your conscience, do the right thing." Then he turned flippant, noting the tax law changes would decrease what types of expenses people can deduct."I'll remind folks it's about no longer writing off courtside seats at the Kings' game," he said, referring to Sacramento's NBA team.On the water issue, meanwhile, Newsom declared confidently that a deal would be struck. While he's proposed a tax, some lawmakers would rather the state use surplus or other general fund dollars. It likely won't be dealt with as part of the budget package due June 15."I don't want to say 'read my lips' because I don't want to see that clip," he joked. "But we're going to get a water deal." 4930

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — As the political battle to overturn California's gas tax increase intensified, the state transportation agency coordinated frequently with the public affairs firm working to block the repeal on behalf of unions, construction companies and local government groups, emails obtained by The Associated Press show.The California State Transportation Agency and Sacramento-based Bicker, Castillo & Fairbanks organized news conferences and other efforts to promote legislation to raise the tax to fund road and bridge repairs, which passed the Legislature in April 2017. After Gov. Jerry Brown signed it, the agency and firm continued planning events and coordinating social media posts as opponents gathered signatures for repeal.Three ethics experts interviewed by the AP said the emails raise concerns that the agency's relationship with the firm was too close, but none saw a clear violation of campaign laws, which prohibit the use of public resources for political campaigns.REPORT: Gas tax funds reportedly being used to campaign against Prop 6The repeal qualified for the November ballot in June. The firm, BCF, continues to work for the anti-repeal coalition, which includes the League of California Cities and the California Chamber of Commerce.Some communications between BCF and the state agency involved politics, according to more than 200 emails from 2017 and the first half of this year obtained by the AP through the California Public Records Act.Last fall, the agency and firm discussed opinion pieces "targeting" U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa and three other vulnerable Republicans in Congress. National Democratic leaders see those seats as key to winning control of the U.S. House.RELATED: Caltrans' gas tax freeway signs raise concerns with FedsIn January, a BCF partner, Kathy Fairbanks, communicated with the agency about designing a campaign logo for Proposition 69, a June ballot measure involving how gas tax proceeds are spent. And an undated memo shows the agency and firm also planned to coordinate efforts for several months through the primary.Loyola Law School Professor and government ethics expert Jessica Levinson said the relationship between the firm and agency appears too close, and the exchange about the congressmen crossed an ethical line.RELATED: California campaign watchdog investigates gas tax campaign"I mean way over the line," she said.BCF and agency officials said the communications were appropriate to educate the public about the law and that they ramped down coordination when the firm took an official campaign role."Clearly the agency was trying to coordinate with the campaign, and they shouldn't have," said Bob Stern, a government ethics expert who helped write California's campaign laws. But he added the actual amount of time government workers spent coordinating with the firm was likely minimal.Ann Ravel, who served on the Federal Election Commission and California's Fair Political Practices Commission, said the volume of emails raises questions about whether the agency aided one side.RELATED: Poll: Support strong for Proposition 6, which repeals California's gas tax"It seems like maybe it's a little too cozy, but I wouldn't say that it's clearly inappropriate," Ravel said.The legislation approved last year raised gas taxes by 12 cents per gallon and added diesel and vehicle fees to generate billion annually. Proposition 6 would repeal the increase and require voters approve gas and vehicle tax increases.The ballot measure is a centerpiece of California Republicans' efforts to boost turnout. GOP Congress members — including House Speaker Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield and Orange County's Mimi Walters — are among the repeal's biggest financial backers.Leaders of the repeal campaign have asked the federal government to investigate their claims that public resources have been used against them, based on emails and other documents that show local government workers discussing the repeal effort. Those documents are different from the ones the AP obtained. Opponents also circulated a video of a Caltrans contractor passing out anti-Proposition 6 fliers to drivers.The California Department of Transportation, known as Caltrans, falls under the state transportation agency.Melissa Figueroa, the agency's deputy secretary for communications and strategic planning, said it's the agency's job to inform the public about the impact of laws, and it has done so in the past, including for California's "motor voter" registration law."We're trying to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars," Figueroa said.The agency communicated much less frequently with the firm and stopped coordinating social media posts once the official anti-Proposition 6 campaign started, Figueroa said."Prior to that point, it was more of a collaborative effort because they were not in campaign mode," Figueroa said.BCF partner Brandon Castillo said the coalition registered as a fundraising committee in December and officially became a ballot measure campaign in March to support Proposition 69.BCF and other gas tax supporters routinely asked the agency for information, but they did not coordinate on creating campaign materials, Figueroa said. The agency also fulfilled numerous public records requests filed by gas tax opponents, she said.However, an undated memo outlining agency and coalition plans from March through the primary election shows the firm and the agency coordinated the timing of announcements and events. It details plans for the state to tout new construction projects while the coalition campaigned for Proposition 69.The agency and coalition coordinated their schedules, but the agency wasn't involved in campaigning for Proposition 69, Figueroa said.Castillo sent the email about op-eds focused on GOP candidates Sept. 20, 2017."Hey Melissa — We're penning opeds (sic) targeting the following congressional republicans," he wrote. He identified Reps. Jeff Denham, Steve Knight, Walters and Issa and asked Figueroa for information about projects funded by the gas tax increase in their districts.At the time, the coalition was working to persuade California's influential Republican congressional delegates to reject the repeal.Several days after Castillo's email, Figueroa suggested she or Brian Kelly, then the agency's leader, help find an author for the piece targeting Issa, considered the most vulnerable California incumbent before he decided against seeking re-election.Castillo responded saying coalition members were working on it and asked: "Do you have anyone in mind that could influence Republicans/Issa?"The documents obtained by the AP don't include further exchanges on the issue. In interviews, Castillo and Figueroa said the agency never suggested an author. Figueroa said she offered help because the op-ed would educate people in Issa's district.The piece ultimately was written by the mayor of Encinitas, a suburb north of San Diego, and ran the following month in the San Diego Union-Tribune. It touted projects in the district funded by the gas tax increase but didn't mention Issa.Levinson found the exchange surprising because it seemed to directly reference campaign activities."I don't want to say it's a smoking gun, but that is so much more explicit than I ever would have predicted they would be," she said.Prominent gas tax repeal supporters, including gubernatorial candidate John Cox and conservative activist Carl DeMaio, criticized the agency's activity."It's against the law, and it also shows that you can't trust them with money," DeMaio said. "I think that what you're seeing is just the tip of the iceberg." 7732

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California has become the first state to offer taxpayer-funded health benefits to young adults living in the country illegally.Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill into law on Tuesday that makes low-income adults age 25 and younger eligible for the state's Medicaid program regardless of their immigration status.State officials expect the plan to cover about 90,000 people and cost taxpayers million. California already covers children ages 18 and younger regardless of immigration status.The law will not give health insurance benefits to everyone 25 and younger, but only those whose income is low enough to qualify.Newsom and Democratic legislative leaders say they plan to further expand coverage to more adults in the years to come. Republican President Donald Trump has called the move "crazy ."Advocates of the measure say it's a way to improve the health of immigrants in the state by providing them with access to the medical care they need.Many immigrants who are in the country illegally are already enrolled for some government-funded programs, but they only cover emergencies and pregnancies.Democrats had pushed to expand the coverage to even more adults, but Newsom rejected the proposals, saying it would cost about .4 billion to provide coverage to all California adults living in the country illegally. But he has vowed to keep expanding coverage in future years. 1428

来源：资阳报