濮阳东方医院早泄效果(濮阳东方好么) (今日更新中)

INDIANAPOLIS — A member of Congress has introduced a bill taking aim at protesters. The "Support Peaceful Protest Act," introduced by Indiana Rep. Jim Banks, would ban protesters convicted on crimes such as violence, looting, or vandalism from federal unemployment assistance. It was introduced on August 28, following several nights of demonstrations in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Protesters would also be held financially liable for the cost of federal policing.In a press release, Banks said:"Antifa thugs are descending on suffering communities, disrupting peaceful protests and leaving violence, looting and vandalism in their wake. They turned Milwaukee, Seattle and Portland into warzones, and now they're moving the chaos to Kenosha, Wisconsin. Who knows which community is next?"The bill is not expected to move in Congress. While the 0 federal boost to unemployment ended in July, some states, including Indiana, have opted in to an extra 0 in federal assistance. This story originally reported by Konah Williams on wrtv.com. 1043

It took Congress almost nine months, but they have finally agreed on another stimulus pkg. The deal provides a one-time stimulus check, extends the eviction mortarium another month, and adds an additional 0 supplemental to extended unemployment benefits.In total, it’s a 0 billion plan that now protects roughly 40 million Americans from potentially being evicted from their homes and prevents 12 million Americans from losing out on unemployment benefits.“It is a success and a win because that won’t happen,” said Stephanie Freed, “Beyond that, it’s not much of a win.”Stephanie Freed is among millions of Americans who are unemployed and have already expired out of unemployment benefits. Under the new deal, she will be able to now apply for unemployment again and will be eligible for the additional 0 weekly supplemental. However, even with reinstated and slightly higher benefits, it will still be a struggle to get by.“The 0 is half of what people needed to survive, and the bigger problem is that it is not retroactive,” said Freed. “There has been five months with no additional benefit, state UI is not a livable wage.”Freed has created an online organization called ExtendPUA in order to help others who are also struggling with unemployment during the pandemic. There are members of Extend PUA that have been getting as little as a week in unemployment benefits since the 0 federal supplemental dropped off in July.Grant McDonald is the co-founder of Extend PUA and knows firsthand that state unemployment benefits alone are not enough to survive. Like many, he has had to drain his savings and take on significant debt to just keep him barely afloat.“Personally, I have not kept up with the number because I have just been trying to keep up with it all,” said McDonald. “I am just trying to pay as much as I can and watch my savings slowly disappear.”In the latest stimulus package, Congress did agree on a 0 stimulus check that some say could help with debt accumulated.“I think 0 is what rich people think poor people think is a lot of money, when in reality, that additional 0 plus the 0, one-time, is not going to help anyone pay any of the accumulated debts,” McDonald added.For Freed, McDonald, and the thousands of unemployed people who have reached out to Extend PUA, the new stimulus deal is something, but nothing close to what they’ve been waiting nearly nine months for.“We understand there are some wins here but mostly it means that we have to keep fighting,” said Freed.The Biden administration has called this latest package a “down payment” to the American people, signaling an expectation for yet another more robust stimulus deal. Members of Congress, on both sides of the aisle, have also mentioned a need for another stimulus deal soon. However, similar messaging was heard after the passage of the CARES Act, and then it took nearly nine months to see a significantly smaller relief package. 2965

It is with great excitement that we can announce Elton's return to the stage in North America on January 19, 2022.For more information, please visit https://t.co/CcJKU471U8 #eltonfarewelltour pic.twitter.com/M3qZrR5yYE— Elton John (@eltonofficial) September 23, 2020 274

It’s a transition of power on pause, with two differing views of how it will unfold.“Whatever happens in the future, who knows, which administration will be. I guess time will tell,” President Donald Trump said.“We are already beginning our transition,” said President-elect Joe Biden. “We're well underway."Yet, it is not happening in the way it normally operates. With nine weeks to go before Inauguration Day, the transition of power between the Trump administration to an incoming Biden administration is hitting some speed bumps.“The transition is really vital for the working of government,” said Todd Belt, a professor and director of the political management program at George Washington University.He said the transition period is about access to information, personnel and money. The Trump-appointed head of the Government Services Administration, Emily Murphy, is refusing to release more than million earmarked for a Biden transition.“She said she will not release it until the election is decided, leaving everybody wondering, ‘When does she think the election is going to be decided?’” Belt asked.That’s a problem in the interim because, he said, that kind of delay could leave the U.S. vulnerable, not just to a rampaging COVID-19 pandemic, but also to potential terrorist threats.“This is particularly important in the areas of national security where the time, the lame-duck period time, between administrations might make a very attractive target for our nation's enemies,” Belt said.There have been transition delays before, like in 2000, after the disputed Bush-Gore election went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. In this current instance, that’s not happening. Belt said that makes the situation this time unchartered territory.“If this gets dragged out beyond early December, it could really hamper a smooth transition,” he said.It is a time period that inches closer by the day. 1918

In the summer of 2013, Aimee Stephens sent her employer a letter explaining she was about to change her life. She was a transgender woman, and she intended to start dressing as such at work.She never expected then that she was about to enter into a yearslong legal dispute, one that might soon become a litmus test for lesbian, gay and transgender rights before the next US Supreme Court.Stephens had spent months drafting the message to management at R&G and G&R Harris Funeral Homes, a family-owned business in the Detroit area, she says. She was 52 years old at the time, and she had spent her entire life fighting the knowledge she was a transgender woman, to the point that she had considered ending her life.Now that she was coming out at work, she hoped her nearly six years of positive performance reviews, which had earned her regular raises, would count in her favor.But her boss, a devout Christian, told her the situation was "not going to work out," according to court documents. Thomas Rost offered her a severance package when she was fired, but she declined to accept it.She filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Department of Labor's enforcement agency, and the government sued the funeral home. The department accused the funeral home of firing Stephens for being transgender and for her refusal to conform to sex-based stereotypes.A district court agreed with the funeral home that the federal workplace discrimination law known as Title VII did not protect transgender people. But it found that the funeral home did discriminate against Stephens for her refusal to conform to its "preferences, expectations, or stereotypes" for women. The EEOC appealed.The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Stephens and the EEOC in March. The funeral home's lawyers accused the court of exceeding its authority by expanding the definition of sex in a way that threatens to "shift" what it means to be a man or a woman.In July, lawyers representing the funeral home asked the Supreme Court to take up the case to determine if transgender individuals are protected under Title VII's sex-based provisions. If the court takes up the case, it could have broader implications for the definition of sex-based discrimination. And it could impact case law that precludes firing anyone -- gay, straight or cisgender -- for not adhering to sex-based stereotypes."The stakes don't get much higher than being able to keep your job," said Harper Jean Tobin, director of policy for the National Center for Transgender Equality. "Harris Funeral Homes is a stark example of the job discrimination that so many transgender people face."Advocates say it's one of the most important current civil rights issues for the transgender community, along with similar considerations in education and health care. And they say it has been settled by years of case law. In the past two decades, numerous federal courts have ruled that federal sex discrimination laws apply to transgender and gender-nonconforming people, including Title VII, the Title IX education law, and Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act.But lawyers from the Alliance Defending Freedom, the conservative Christian nonprofit representing the funeral home, say it's far from settled."No court or federal agency has the authority to rewrite a federal statute. That power belongs solely to Congress. Replacing 'sex' with 'gender identity,' as the 6th Circuit and the EEOC have done, is a dramatic change," senior counsel Jim Campbell said in a statement."What it means to be male or female shifts from a biological reality based in anatomy and physiology to a subjective perception. Far-reaching consequences accompany such a transformation." 3767

来源：资阳报