濮阳东方妇科评价比较高濮阳东方医院妇科专不专业,濮阳东方妇科好不好,濮阳东方妇科在哪个地方,濮阳东方看妇科病技术很靠谱,濮阳东方医院男科治疗早泄收费不贵,濮阳东方医院治阳痿好不,濮阳东方技术安全放心

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — For decades, California and the federal government have had a co-parenting agreement when it comes to the state's diverse population of endangered species and the scarce water that keeps them alive.Now, it appears the sides could be headed for a divorce.State lawmakers sent to the governor early Saturday morning a bill aimed at stopping the Trump administration from weakening oversight of longstanding federal environmental laws in California. The lawmakers want to make it easier for state regulators to issue emergency regulations when that happens."The feds are taking away significant pieces of water protection law, of air protection law, and California has to step into the void," Democratic Assemblyman Mark Stone said.Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has 30 days to decide whether to veto the bill, sign it into law or allow it to become law without his signature.The bill survived a furious lobbying effort on the Legislature's final day, withstanding opposition from the state's water contractors and Democratic U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein."We can't really have a California system and a federal system," said Jeffrey Kightlinger, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which delivers water to nearly 19 million people. "We're all in the same country here, so we need to find a way to make this work."California has a history of blunting Republican efforts at the federal level to roll back environmental protections. In 2003, shortly after the George W. Bush administration lowered federal Clean Air Act standards, the Legislature passed a law banning California air quality management districts from revising rules and regulations to match.More recently, after the Trump administration announced plans to roll back auto mileage and emission standards, Newsom used the state's regulatory authority to broker a deal with four major automakers to toughen the standards anyway.State lawmakers tried this last year, but a similar proposal failed to pass the state Assembly. But advocates say several recent announcements by the Trump administration — including plans to weaken application of the federal Endangered Species Act — have strengthened support for the bill.The bill would potentially play out most prominently in the management of the state's water, which mostly comes from snowmelt and rain that rushes through a complex system of aqueducts to provide drinking water for nearly 40 million people and irrigation to the state's billion agricultural industry.The bill would make it easier for state regulators to add animals protected under California's Endangered Species Act — animals that have historically been protected under federal law. It would then apply the state's Endangered Species Act to the Central Valley Project, a federally operated system of aqueducts and reservoirs that control flooding and supply irrigation to farmers.But it's not clear if a state law would apply to a federal project, "which could generate years of litigation and uncertainty over which environmental standards apply," according to a letter by Feinstein and four members of the state's Democratic congressional delegation.Plus, Kightlinger warns the proposal would disrupt complex negotiations among state and federal entities and water agencies over the Water Quality Control Plan. If all sides can sign these voluntary agreements, it would avert costly litigation that would delay environmental protections for fish and other species impacted by the water projects."We're pretty close. We believe we can get to completion by December. If (this bill) passes, half of the water districts pull out and go to litigation instead," Kightlinger said. "That's something that would be terrible for our ecosystem and what we're trying to achieve here."Senate President Pro Tempore Toni Atkins, the bill's author, insisted early Saturday the bill would not impact those voluntary agreements."We really and truly did work in good faith to try to address those concerns," she said. 4049

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California will limit rent increases for some people over the next decade after Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law Tuesday aimed at combating a housing crisis in the nation's most populous state.Newsom signed the bill at an event in Oakland, an area where a recent report documented a 43% increase in homelessness over two years. Sudden rent increases are a contributing cause of the state's homeless problem, which has drawn national attention and the ire of Republican President Donald Trump."He wasn't wrong to highlight a vulnerability," Newsom said of Trump's criticisms to an audience of housing advocates in Oakland. "He's exploiting it. You're trying to solve it. That's the difference between you and the president of the United States."The law limits rent increases to 5% each year plus inflation until Jan. 1, 2030. It bans landlords from evicting people for no reason, meaning they could not kick people out so they can raise the rent for a new tenant. And while the law doesn't take effect until Jan. 1, it would apply to rent increases on or after March 15, 2019, to prevent landlords from raising rents just before the caps go into place.RELATED: San Diego's top neighborhoods to get more rental space for the moneyCalifornia and Oregon are now the only places that cap rent increases statewide. Oregon capped rents at 7% plus inflation earlier this year.California's rent cap is noteworthy because of its scale. The state has 17 million renters, and more than half of them spend at least 30% of their income on rent, according to a legislative analysis of the proposal.But California's new law has so many exceptions that it is estimated it will apply to 8 million of those 17 million renters, according to the office of Democratic Assemblyman David Chiu, who authored the bill Newsom signed.It would not apply to housing built within the last 15 years, a provision advocates hope will encourage developers to build more in a state that desperately needs it. It does not apply to single family homes, except those owned by corporations or real estate investment trusts. It does not cover duplexes where the owner lives in one of the units.RELATED: Making It In San Diego: How housing got so expensiveAnd it does not cover the 2 million people in California who already have rent control, which is a more restrictive set of limitations for landlords. Most of the state's largest cities, including Los Angeles, Oakland, and San Francisco, have some form of rent control. But a state law passed in 1995 bans any new rent control policies since that year.Last year, voters rejected a statewide ballot initiative that would have expanded rent control statewide. For most places in California, landlords can raise rent at any time and or any reason if they give notice in advance.That's what happened to Sasha Graham in 2014. She said her rent went up 150%. She found the money to pay it on time and in full, but her landlord evicted her anyway without giving a reason. She was homeless for the next three years, staying with friends, then friends of friends and then strangers."Sometimes I lived with no lights, sometimes I lived with no water, depending on who I was living with (because) they were also struggling," she said. "Sometimes I just had to use my money to go to a hotel room so I could finish my homework."Graham, who is now board president for the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, now lives in family housing at the University of California, Berkeley, where she is scheduled to graduate in May. She said the law, had it been in place, would have helped her.But Russell Lowery, executive director of the California Rental Housing Association, says the law adds an expensive eviction process that did not previously exist. He said that will encourage landlords to increase rents when they otherwise wouldn't."It adds unnecessary expenses to all rental home providers and makes it more difficult to sever a relationship with a problem tenant," he said. 4034

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California police say a man brandished what they later learned was a fake gun during a standoff that resulted in the evacuation of a hotel. The Sacramento Bee reported guests were evacuated from a Comfort Inn in Red Bluff early Saturday during a standoff between police and a domestic violence suspect. The Red Bluff Police Department said in a release that 21-year-old Christian Sandoval-Perez of Corning faces multiple charges including child abuse and domestic violence. Officers went to the hotel’s second floor and encountered Sandoval-Perez with a gun. He held off police for more than 75 minutes. 637

Rooted in its western heritage, Arizona has long been a state focused on freedoms.“Historically it was a lot of ranchers and rural,” said Valerie Hoekstra, Politics and Global Studies Professor at Arizona State University. “You’re not required to wear a helmet on a motorcycle, you can sit in the back of a pickup truck. All these things that are part of the individualistic tradition that sometimes overlap with liberal values, and sometimes just that western culture.”But things are shifting in the Grand Canyon State.“I don’t think we can count it as a red state anymore, it’s not a blue state for sure either,” Hoekstra said.A Democratic presidential candidate has not carried the state of Arizona since Bill Clinton did so 24 years ago in 1996. However, Tuesday night’s election results show Arizona’s Republican preference is shifting. There’s heavy support this election for both Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, and U.S. Senate Candidate Mark Kelly. Both gaining major support in areas like Phoenix and Tucson, two of Arizona’s most populous areas.Several factors may be contributing to the political shift. Over the years, Arizona has become a hot spot for transplants from across the country, especially California, a largely Democratic-leaning state. About 60,000 Californians moved to Arizona in 3017 alone, according to Census Bureau data. Then there’s also Arizona’s growing Hispanic population.“The increasing Latino Latina population in this state that happens to be Democratic leaning and identify as Democrats,” Hoekstra said. And then there’s the young people.“The universities are huge and growing and the students seem to be more active.”That’s a change from the new residents Arizona is often known for attracting. “It was a haven for retirees and snowbirds,” she said. “People who don't really want to pay taxes and moved here for those reasons.”State voter registration statistics show a record number of registered voters in Arizona as of November 2020, with just over 4.2 million. For comparison, the state’s population is closing in on 7.3 million people as of last year. Of the registered voters, 35.24% registered as Republican and 32.20% as Democrat. Getting those voters to turn out, is another battle.“Just the candidates themselves mobilize people one way or another, or demobilize some people maybe, too,” Hoekstra explained. She said just because Arizona swung blue this time, doesn’t mean it will in the future as the demographics of the state continue to change. “It’s up for grabs.” 2540

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Companies affiliated with Gov. Gavin Newsom received nearly million in loans designed to help small businesses survive the pandemic. Newly released information from the federal government reveals more than eight times the amount of loans originally reported. The governor put his business holdings into a blind trust before he took office and so would not have participated in the decision. But the disclosure comes as he already is battling criticism that he is elitist despite his protests that he is a proud small businessman and entrepreneur. Nine businesses tied to Newsom’s PlumpJack Group split the nearly .9 million in loans. The watchdog group Project On Government Oversight says it was a surprisingly large loan. 762