濮阳东方医院男科价格非常低(濮阳东方妇科怎么预约) (今日更新中)

The U.S. Olympic Committee has announced Salt Lake City will be its choice in a bid for the Winter Games in 2030 or beyond."We won!" Governor Gary Herbert cheered, holding hands in victory with Salt Lake City Mayor Jackie Biskupski, Council Chairwoman Erin Mendenhall and others."This has been the culmination of a significant team effort, starting with the support of the public," the governor added.The announcement came following a meeting by the U.S. Olympic Committee in San Francisco on Friday. Salt Lake City was competing with Denver for the nomination.The International Olympic Committee is expected to pick the next host cities for future Games in 2023.Salt Lake City has argued it is uniquely situated to host another Olympics. Our venues are still operating and in excellent condition and our infrastructure is in place with billions in expansions (light rail, a new airport, etc.). There is also significant support with polls showing 89% of Utahns in favor of another bid."We feel like we’re as prepared as we could be. We have unanimity with our public officials that have lined up behind this effort," said Jeff Robbins, the president of the Utah Sports Commission.The cost to host an Olympics would also be cheaper than other cities. It would cost about .4 billion, but boosters insist it would not cost any state or local tax dollars. Instead, it would be paid for in broadcast rights, sponsorships and ticket sales."People say, 'Well, is this worth the investment?' The investment is zero! Look at all we get. Number one, we get the spotlight of the world on Utah and we get to show the world what a great state this is, what great people are here. The volunteers were fantastic last time," said Fraser Bullock, an executive for Salt Lake's 2002 Winter Olympics and the co-chair of this Olympic Exploratory Committee.Utah estimates it received more than billion in economic benefit from the 2002 Winter Olympics. Mayor Biskupski said she envisioned the next Games that Utah could host would be even better. She said there would be an emphasis on sustainability (as in, environmentally friendly) and a modern Olympics."This will be an entirely new Games and experience. We're excited to bring that vision," she said. 2247

The Trump administration has finalized a regulation that overturns Obama-era protections for transgender people against sex discrimination in health care. Friday's action is certain to be challenged in court by LGBTQ groups and others.The policy shift, long-sought by the president’s religious and socially conservative supporters, defines gender as a person’s biological sex. The Obama regulation defined gender as a person’s internal sense of being male, female, neither, or a combination.The Trump administration said that the new rules come with a .9 billion budget reduction over the course of five years. The costs are associated with enforcement efforts. “HHS respects the dignity of every human being, and as we have shown in our response to the pandemic, we vigorously protect and enforce the civil rights of all to the fullest extent permitted by our laws as passed by Congress. We are unwavering in our commitment to enforcing civil rights in healthcare,” Roger Severino, Director of the Office for Civil Rights at HHS.The Human Rights Campaign already announced it will sue the Trump Administration to stop the move.“We cannot and will not allow Donald Trump to continue attacking us. Today, the Human Rights Campaign is announcing plans to sue the Trump administration for exceeding their legal authority and attempting to remove basic health care protections from vulnerable communities including LGBTQ people. And, to add insult to injury, the administration finalized this rule on the anniversary of the Pulse shooting, where a gunman killed 49 people in an LGBTQ nightclub,” said HRC President Alphonso David. “LGBTQ people get sick. LGBTQ people need health care. LGBTQ people should not live in fear that they cannot get the care they need simply because of who they are. It is clear that this administration does not believe that LGBTQ people, or other marginalized communities, deserve equality under the law. 1940

The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the Trump administration can end census field operations early, in a blow to efforts to make sure minorities and hard-to-enumerate communities are properly counted in the crucial once-a-decade tally.The decision was not a total loss for plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the administration’s decision to end the count early. They managed to get nearly two extra weeks of counting people as the case made its way through the courts.However, the ruling increased the chances of the Trump administration retaining control of the process that decides how many congressional seats each state gets — and by extension how much voting power each state has.The Supreme Court justices’ ruling came as the nation’s largest association of statisticians, and even the U.S. Census Bureau’s own census takers and partners, have been raising questions about the quality of the data being gathered — numbers that are used to determine how much federal funding and how many congressional seats are allotted to states.After the Supreme Court’s decision, the Census Bureau said field operations would end on Thursday.At issue was a request by the Trump administration that the Supreme Court suspend a lower court’s order extending the 2020 census through the end of October following delays caused by the pandemic. The Trump administration argued that the head count needed to end immediately to give the bureau time to meet a year-end deadline. Congress requires the bureau to turn in by Dec. 31 the figures used to decide the states’ congressional seats — a process known as apportionment.By sticking to the deadline, the Trump administration would end up controlling the numbers used for the apportionment, no matter who wins next month’s presidential election.In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the Supreme Court’s decision “regrettable and disappointing,” and said the administration’s actions “threaten to politically and financially exclude many in America’s most vulnerable communities from our democracy.”Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the high court’s decision, saying “respondents will suffer substantial injury if the Bureau is permitted to sacrifice accuracy for expediency.”The Supreme Court ruling came in response to a lawsuit by a coalition of local governments and civil rights groups, arguing that minorities and others in hard-to-count communities would be missed if the census ended early. They said the schedule was cut short to accommodate a July order from President Donald Trump that would exclude people in the country illegally from being counted in the numbers used for apportionment.Opponents of the order said it followed the strategy of the late Republican redistricting guru, Thomas Hofeller, who had advocated using voting-age citizens instead of the total population when it came to drawing legislative seats since that would favor Republicans and non-Hispanic whites.Last month, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California sided with the plaintiffs and issued an injunction suspending a Sept. 30 deadline for finishing the 2020 census and a Dec. 31 deadline for submitting the apportionment numbers. That caused the deadlines to revert back to a previous Census Bureau plan that had field operations ending Oct. 31 and the reporting of apportionment figures at the end of April 2021.When the Census Bureau, and the Commerce Department, which oversees the statistical agency, picked an Oct. 5 end date, Koh struck that down too, accusing officials of “lurching from one hasty, unexplained plan to the next ... and undermining the credibility of the Census Bureau and the 2020 Census.”An appellate court panel upheld Koh’s order allowing the census to continue through October but struck down the part that suspended the Dec. 31 deadline for turning in apportionment numbers. The panel of three appellate judges said that just because the year-end deadline is impossible to meet doesn’t mean the court should require the Census Bureau to miss it.The plaintiffs said the ruling against them was not a total loss, as millions more people were counted during the extra two weeks.“Every day has mattered, and the Supreme Court’s order staying the preliminary injunction does not erase the tremendous progress that has been made as a result of the district court’s rulings,” said Melissa Sherry, one of the attorneys for the coalition.Besides deciding how many congressional seats each state gets, the census helps determine how .5 trillion in federal funding is distributed each year.San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo said that his city lost 0 million in federal funding over the decade following the 2010 census, and he feared it would lose more this time around. The California city was one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.“A census count delayed is justice denied,” Liccardo said.With plans for the count hampered by the pandemic, the Census Bureau in April had proposed extending the deadline for finishing the count from the end of July to the end of October, and pushing the apportionment deadline from Dec. 31 to next April. The proposal to extend the apportionment deadline passed the Democratic-controlled House, but the Republican-controlled Senate didn’t take up the request. Then, in late July and early August, bureau officials shortened the count schedule by a month so that it would finish at the end of September.The Senate Republicans’ inaction coincided with Trump’s order directing the Census Bureau to have the apportionment count exclude people who are in the country illegally. The order was later ruled unlawful by a panel of three district judges in New York, but the Trump administration appealed that case to the Supreme Court.The Supreme Court decision comes as a report by the the American Statistical Association has found that a shortened schedule, dropped quality control procedures, pending lawsuits and the outside politicization of some parts of the 2020 census have raised questions about the quality of the nation’s head count that need to be answered if the final numbers are going to be trusted.The Census Bureau says it has counted 99.9% of households nationwide, though some regions of the country such as parts of Mississippi and hurricane-battered Louisiana fall well below that.As the Census Bureau winds down field operations over the next several days, there will be a push to get communities in those two states counted, said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, one of the litigants in the lawsuit.“That said, the Supreme Court’s order will result in irreversible damage to the 2020 Census,” Clarke said.___Follow Mike Schneider on Twitter at https://twitter.com/MikeSchneiderAP 6792

The task is painstaking and painful.A searcher is given the name of someone who is missing and an address. The list of names goes on and on.At least 1,300 people are unaccounted for since the Camp Fire erupted 10 days ago, killing 76 people and becoming the deadliest and most destructive fire in California history.Search teams are combing properties where all evidence of life has been wiped out by flames. Many of the searchers are from the devastated areas and have lost their own homes. They are looking for the remains of their neighbors in the ruins."It is overwhelming, I don't have any word to describe it," Butte County Sheriff and Coroner Kory Honea said. "This is unprecedented. No one has had to deal with this magnitude that caused so much destruction and regrettably so much death."The Camp Fire has destroyed more than 9,800 homes and scorched 149,000 acres since it started November 8. It was 55% contained as of early Sunday.Meanwhile, three deaths have been reported in the Woolsey Fire in Southern California, bringing the statewide death toll from the wildfires to 79. 1097

The Russian lawyer who met last year with senior members of the Trump campaign said Donald Trump Jr. told her at the meeting that a Trump administration would be willing to review a 2012 sanctions law.Natalia Veselnitskaya, the lawyer who attended the meeting, made her comments from Moscow in an interview with Bloomberg published Monday.She said Trump Jr. told her: "Looking ahead, if we come to power, we can return to this issue and think what to do about it." 472

来源：资阳报