濮阳市东方医院收费高吗濮阳东方看男科技术权威,濮阳东方医院治疗早泄评价很好,濮阳东方妇科医院技术可靠,濮阳东方医院男科怎么样,濮阳东方男科医院割包皮手术便宜,濮阳东方看男科口碑好不好,濮阳东方医院治阳痿很正规

The U.S. House of Representatives voted in a bipartisan manner to remove statues honoring Confederate leaders from the Capitol. The bill was approved by a 305-113 vote on Wednesday, with 72 Republicans joining Democrats in support of the bill.The bill also would remove the bust of Roger Brooke Taney and replace it with Thurgood Marshall’s bust. Taney’s bust is located in the Old Supreme Court Chamber inside the Capitol complex.Taney infamous;y ruled in 1857 that Blacks could not be full US citizens in the Dred Scott v Sandford case. Taney wrote the Supreme Court opinion which upheld slavery in the United States.Previously, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi targeted 11 statues for removal.The statues are held in Statuary Hall, and is a prominent spot for visitors of the US Capitol. The hall is frequently seen in the background of media interviews with members of Congress.Each state sends two statues to be viewed in Statuary Hall. States largely decide on the statues to be displayed in the hall. Among the statues in Statuary Hall include Confederacy president Jefferson Davis and Confederate commander Robert E. Lee.Democratic Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland sponsored the bill.“I believe that most Americans are deeply distressed by racial injustice and want to see the progress of the Civil Rights Movement continue,” Hoyer said. They want our nation and our democracy to grow, mature, and become more perfect. Part of that process is making it clear, through our symbols and public displays of honor, what our country stands for and, as importantly, what it must never stand for again."Republican Paul Mitchell, R-Mich., joined Hoyer in calling for the removal of the statues.“The history of this nation is so fraught with racial division, with hatred, and the only way to overcome that is to recognize that, acknowledge it for what it is. So I support this resolution,” Mitchell said.Mitchell added that the statues should be returned to the states and be used for appropriate historical context.“Tearing it down does not do justice for the history of this nation and what our young people must understand,” Mitchell added.Whether the bill gets heard in the Senate remains doubtful, as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last month the removal of the statues is a “bridge too far.” 2306

The Trump administration will end the protected immigration status of thousands of Central Americans who have been living in the US nearly two decades, urging Congress to act if it wants to spare those individuals from being uprooted.Department of Homeland Security acting Secretary Elaine Duke has decided to terminate Temporary Protected Status for Nicaragua with a 12-month delay, the department announced Monday night. DHS also said Duke has not been able to reach a decision on Honduras despite different agencies' input, triggering an automatic six-month extension. At the end of that six-month window, the homeland security secretary will make a decision to terminate or further extend the status.The Trump administration has signaled a desire to wind down the protections of Temporary Protected Status, which is an immigration status allowed by law for certain countries experiencing dire conditions, such as a natural disaster, epidemic or war. TPS protects individuals from deportation and authorizes them to work in the US. Without TPS, those individuals revert to whatever status they had previously -- which could leave large numbers as undocumented immigrants.In encouraging Congress to act if it wants to extend those protections permanently, the Trump administration echoed its move in ending the popular Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which protects hundreds of thousands of young undocumented immigrants brought to the US as children and which President Donald Trump decided to sunset this fall.Both decisions were due by Monday, as the status was set to expire January 5. There is a 60-days-in-advance requirement by law to make a determination on extending or terminating Temporary Protected Status.The roughly 5,300 individuals from Nicaragua affected by this decision have lived in the US roughly 20 years: To qualify for TPS, Nicaraguans must have been living in the US continuously since January 5, 1999, after Hurricane Mitch devastated the country.DHS officials told reporters that Duke did not yet have enough information to make a decision on the 86,000 individuals covered under the Honduran protections, which by law triggers a six-month extension. Hondurans also have to have been living in the US continuously since January 5, 1999 to qualify, also due to Hurricane Mitch.The move was being closely watched and heavily lobbied on both sides.Though the administration says it is evaluating each country on its own, it has been more aggressive than previous administrations in evaluating only whether conditions have improved from what triggered the initial designation, regardless of dire conditions continuing due to other causes. That has the support of conservatives like Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, who wrote DHS last week urging them to not perpetually renew TPS.In the next few months, the status of hundreds of thousands of TPS recipients will be up for decision. The Trump administration has already terminated the status for Sudan, extended protections for South Sudan, and given itself an extra six months to decide on protections for roughly 58,000 Haitians. That will be the next decision due, at the end of the month. When former Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly extended Haitian TPS another six months over the summer, he encouraged recipients to either apply for status under some other means or prepare to depart the US.In extending Nicaraguan protections for a final 12 months, DHS officials on a call with reporters urged those recipients to "seek an alternative lawful immigration status in the United States, if eligible, or, if necessary, arrange for their departure."Coming up early next year is also a decision for El Salvador, with roughly 260,000 people covered from that country, who have lived in the US more than 15 years.One official also called on Congress to act if they want individuals to remain permanently. Democrats have heavily lobbied DHS to preserve the protections, as have advocacy groups and business groups like the US Chamber of Commerce."Only Congress can legislate a permanent solution and provide those in an otherwise perpetually temporary status with a certain future," the official said.Democrats were quick to call out the administration's move. The Congressional Hispanic Caucus called on Congress to act following the administration's "reckless" action."The Trump administration's irresponsible decision to end TPS for Nicaraguans will tear apart families and upend the lives of these hard-working individuals," CHC Chairwoman Michelle Lujan Grisham said in a statement. "These immigrants have lived in the United States for nearly 20 years and have raised US citizen children, contributed to our economy and enriched our communities. Deporting families who are contributing to the economic and social fabric of our nation isn't leadership; it's a reckless and callous abuse of power."  4920

The Senate has passed its long-stalled legislation that would overhaul how sexual harassment complaints are made and handled on Capitol Hill and would hold members of Congress personally responsible for paying such settlements out of their own pockets.The legislation moved forward following a deal reached by Missouri Republican Sen. Roy Blunt and Minnesota Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, and praised by leaders of both parties in the Senate.The bill now goes back to the House of Representatives, which passed its version in February and where the expectation is that there will be a conference committee to work out the differences between the two bills after Congress returns from its weeklong Memorial Day recess.The differences between the House's and Senate's versions of the legislation include the language used in describing when a member would be required to pay for settlements -- and when they would not -- and the reporting of settlements.California Republican Rep. Jackie Speier, one of the chief negotiators of the House's bill said that there is "disappointment" in Senate's bill among some members on both sides of the aisle in the House."We will go to conference and hopefully we can iron out some of those differences," Speier said Thursday on CNN's "New Day."There also is criticism of the Senate's bill among some outside advocacy groups, which have written to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Minority Chuck Schumer expressing concern that the House bill became essentially too watered down in the Senate's negotiations."This bill contains numerous provisions that are contrary to key principles we've previously articulated, falls short of an acceptable compromise, and may have unintended negative consequences," says a letter sent to Senate leaders signed by the American Civil Liberties Union, Equal Pay Today, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights National Women's Law Center and Public Citizen.Additionally, these groups say they see "significant differences" between the House and Senate bills and are "deeply concerned" that "neither senators nor key stakeholders have been given adequate time to fully vet the bill."Congressional sources tell CNN there are numerous areas that the discussion will center on when the two sides meet to work out a compromise.Among the chief areas of concern: The provision for members being held personally responsible in the Senate bill states that they have to pay out of pocket only for sexual harassment, not for any awards that may be ordered for sex discrimination or any other kind of discrimination. Some fear that could provide a loophole for members who are accused of harassment to settle with a victim for sex discrimination, knowing that they won't be required to pay the settlement and it will instead come out of a US Treasury fund.Additionally, there is concern that in the Senate's legislation would empower and involve the Ethics Committee more so than the House's. The Senate version would give the chair and ranking member of the committee the authority to overrule settlement repayments. The House bill would create a third-party investigatory process instead. 3183

The United States has seen its share of natural disasters in recent weeks. From a massive derecho in Iowa, to wildfires in the Western United States along with hurricanes striking the Gulf Coast, severe weather has taken a toll on the country.This has especially been true for the American Red Cross.The Red Cross said on Friday that recent events have caused the Red Cross to cancel 100 blood drives, resulting in 2,700 blood platelet and plasma donations being lost. This has also had an impact on other blood collection centers, the Red Cross said.Amid the pandemic, the Red Cross said that its process is safe, and that it will take precautions to avoid spreading germs. Red Cross staff will be wearing gloves, routinely wiping down donor-touched areas, using sterile collection sets for every donation, and preparing the arm for donation with an aseptic scrub.You can make an appointment to donate blood by using the Red Cross Blood Donor App, visiting RedCrossBlood.org or calling 1-800-RED CROSS (1-800-733-2767).To give blood, people can donate once every 56 days, must be in good health and feeling well, be at least age 16, and weigh 110 pounds, depending on height. Those who donate will be asked to produce an ID, and be asked several medical questions.The whole process takes 10-15 minutes, the Red Cross said. 1331

The White House on Wednesday downplayed comments by national security adviser John Bolton, who recently invoked Libya's decision to denuclearize during the Bush administration as a model for US policy on North Korea, potentially placing a planned US-North Korea summit in jeopardy.Hours earlier, a North Korean official said Bolton's remarks were indicative of an "awfully sinister move" to imperil the Kim regime. North Korea stunned Washington on Tuesday by threatening to abandon talks between President Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un if Washington insists on pushing it "into a corner" on nuclear disarmament.Referring to the Libya comparison, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Wednesday that she hadn't "seen that as part of any discussions so I'm not aware that that's a model that we're using."I haven't seen that that's a specific thing. I know that that comment was made. There's not a cookie cutter model on how this would work."She continued, "This is the President Trump model. He's going to run this the way he sees fit. We're 100% confident, as we've said many times before, as I'm sure you're all aware, he's the best negotiator and we're very confident on that front."In April, Bolton suggested that the White House was looking at Libya as an example of how it will handle negotiations with North Korea to denuclearize."We have very much in mind the Libya model from 2003, 2004," Bolton said on Fox News. "There are obviously differences. The Libyan program was much smaller. But that was basically the agreement that we made."The US agreed to ease sanctions on Libya in 2003 in exchange for a promise by Moammar Gadhafi to abandon his country's nuclear program. Eight years later, however, Gadhafi was overthrown and killed by rebels backed by Washington.In a statement published late Tuesday by the state-run Korea Central News Agency, Kim Kye Gwan, North Korea's first vice minister of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, called Bolton's comments indicative of "an awfully sinister move to impose on our dignified state the destiny of Libya or Iraq which had been collapsed due to yielding the whole of their countries to big powers.""It is absolutely absurd to dare compare (North Korea), a nuclear weapon state, to Libya which had been at the initial stage of nuclear development," Kim said. "(The) world knows too well that our country is neither Libya nor Iraq which have met miserable fate."Singling out the national security adviser for personal criticism, Kim said that North Korea had "shed light on the quality of (John) Bolton already in the past, and we do not hide our feeling of repugnance towards him."  2657