濮阳东方医院男科治疗早泄可靠濮阳市东方医院口碑高,濮阳东方妇科在什么位置,濮阳东方医院男科治早泄评价高专业,濮阳东方男科医院割包皮手术多少钱,濮阳东方医院男科看阳痿非常可靠,濮阳东方看妇科价格便宜,濮阳东方妇科医院做人流价格便宜

Robert Trump, the younger brother of President Donald Trump, is hospitalized in New York, the White House confirmed Friday. “Can confirm the report that the President’s brother is hospitalized,” deputy press secretary Judd Deere told CNN. via @betsy_klein— Abby D. Phillip (@abbydphillip) August 14, 2020 312

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KGTV) -- As Californias head out to vote, many important propositions and measures are on the ballot this November.One of those initiatives is Proposition 16.If approved, Prop 16 would repeal Proposition 209 from the state constitution which, according to BallotPedia, banned the use of affirmative action involving sex or race-based preferences.Those in support of Proposition 16 argue that it takes a step toward “dismantling structural racism and sexism.”Meanwhile, those opposed to the proposition point to Prop 209 as to why voters should mark "no" on the ballot. “The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin, in the operation of public employment, public education, and public contracting,” the website states in reference to a passage from Prop 209.See what a vote for or against Proposition means below, according to the state's voter guide:YES: A YES vote on this measure means: State and local entities could consider race, sex, color, ethnicity, and national origin in public education, public employment, and public contracting to the extent allowed under federal and state law.NO: A NO vote on this measure means: The current ban on the consideration of race, sex, color, ethnicity, and national origin in public education, public employment, and public contracting would remain in effect. 1452

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A proposal to make it easier for local California governments to raise taxes or issue bonds for infrastructure projects has failed in the state Assembly.The effort by Democratic Assemblywoman Cecilia Aguiar-Curry was a constitutional amendment. That means it also would have needed approval from voters at the ballot to become law.It would have lowered the threshold for local governments to raise taxes and issue bonds from two-thirds to 55 percent. Supporters say the higher threshold made it too difficult for local communities to raise money for schools, libraries and other projects.But opponents say the two-thirds threshold is a necessary protection for taxpayers.It failed to pass the Assembly despite Democrats holding a supermajority. Aguiar-Curry may bring it up for a vote again later this year. 841

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Pacific Gas & Electric's key lenders on Tuesday offered a billion plan to pull the utility out of bankruptcy and give the tarnished company a new name.The proposal filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court would set aside up to billion of that billion to pay claims on the 2017 and 2018 wildfires caused by PG&E equipment, the Sacramento Bee reported.The plan offered by PG&E's leading bondholders would compete with an alternative that the newspaper says is being drafted by PG&E. Normally the company in bankruptcy has first crack at proposing an exit plan, but the bondholders said in a court filing that they filed their plan because PG&E has "wasted crucial time needlessly."The bondholders also want to rebrand PG&E as Golden State Power Light & Gas Company.Asked about the bondholders' plan, the utility said in a statement that it was considering all options as it navigates the bankruptcy process.The new proposal came four days after Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, floated the idea of a billion package to deal with the costs of future wildfires, paid for by ratepayers and shareholders of PG&E and the other two big electric utilities in California.Newsom's plan does not offer any cash for PG&E's existing liabilities but would revise state law to give utilities more certainty about recovering costs from ratepayers — enough stability that Newsom believes will allow PG&E to borrow the money it needs to pay existing claims, according to the Bee.The bondholders include some of the biggest investors on Wall Street, including Elliott Management, Pimco and Apollo Global Management. They have been quietly promoting a PG&E restructuring plan for weeks in conversations with legislators, Newsom's aides and others. Tuesday's court filing marks the first time they have taken the proposal public."Substantial new capital must be infused into the company," the bondholders said in their court filing.The governor's office had no immediate comment on the bondholders' proposal.Like Newsom's plan, the proposal is "ratepayer neutral" — meaning, customer rates would not go up to pay the costs of getting PG&E out of bankruptcy.But ratepayers would pay: The plan calls for a .50 monthly charge, a feature of PG&E bills since the 2001 energy crisis, to be extended for several years to help raise dollars for a wildfire insurance fund proposed by Newsom last week. That fund would help pay claims for future fires.___Information from: The Sacramento Bee, http://www.sacbee.com 2574

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's state auditor says the California State Lottery skimped on giving million in revenue to fund public education funding and spent 0,000 on food and travel expenses without considering cheaper options. The auditor's report made public Tuesday says the lottery agency should have accounted for an increase in profits for the fiscal year that ended in June 2018 by providing million in public education financing.The auditor also recommended that the state legislature amend the Lottery Act to ensure audits of the lottery's procurement process at least once every three years.The California State Lottery says in a written response accompanying the audit that it disagrees with the auditor's findings and that the agency gives the most money it can for education.“Lottery revenues and contributions to education were declining in the years prior to the passage of AB 142. The year before this change, the Lottery’s contributions to education were approximately .05 billion. In contrast, last year the Lottery provided .8 billion–the highest contribution to date. Had the Lottery utilized CSA’s interpretation of the law, it would have had to intentionally suppress sales for certain games, resulting in fewer dollars to public education," CA Lottery wrote. “The Lottery disagrees with CSA’s underlying conclusions of the value of its Fairs and Festivals program. The Lottery must continually raise brand awareness, incentivize and persuade California adults to voluntarily purchase Lottery products to meet its mandate to provide supplemental funding to education." 1623