济南脚拇指红肿出浓济南痛风疼痛治疗到哪家医院好,济南痛风的临床特点不包括,山东能引起痛风的食物,济南血尿酸尿酸,济南治疗痛风有什么妙招,济南痛风该怎么治疗,北京的了脚痛风怎么办

The demand for mail-in ballots is surging. Election workers need training. And polling booths might have to be outfitted with protective shields during the COVID-19 pandemic.As officials prepare for the Nov. 3 election, one certainty is clear: It’s coming with a big price tag.“Election officials don’t have nearly the resources to make the preparations and changes they need to make to run an election in a pandemic,” said Wendy Weiser, head of the democracy program at the Brennan Center for Justice. “We are seeing this all over the place.”The pandemic has sent state and local officials scrambling to prepare for an election like few others, an extraordinary endeavor during a presidential contest, as virus cases continue to rise across much of the U.S.COVID-related worries are bringing demands for steps to make sure elections that are just four months away are safe. But long-promised federal aid to help cash-starved states cope is stalled on Capitol Hill.The money would help pay for transforming the age-old voting process into a pandemic-ready system. Central to that is the costs for printing mail-in ballots and postage. There are also costs to ensure in-person voting is safe with personal protective equipment, or PPE, for poll workers, who tend to be older and more at risk of getting sick from the virus, and training for new workers. Pricey machines are needed to quickly count the vote.Complicating matters is President Donald Trump’s aversion to mail-in balloting. With worrisome regularity, he derides the process as rigged, even though there’s no evidence of fraud and his own reelection team is adapting to the new reality of widespread mail-in voting.“As cases of coronavirus in this country rise, it’s vital that all voters be able to cast their ballots from home, to cast their ballots by mail,” said Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn.A huge COVID response bill passed by the House in May contains a whopping .6 billion to help states with their elections, but the Senate won’t turn to the measure until late July. Republicans fought a 0 million installment of election aid this March before agreeing to it.But key Senate Republicans seem likely to support more election funding, despite Trump’s opposition, and are even offering to lower a requirement that states put up “matching” funds to qualify for the federal cash.“I’m prepared not only to look at more money for the states to use as they see fit for elections this year, but also to even consider whatever kind of matching requirement we have,” said Roy Blunt, R-Mo., chairman of the Senate panel with responsibility for the issue. “We can continue to work toward an election that produces a result that people have confidence in and done in a way that everybody that wants to vote, gets to vote.”The pandemic erupted this spring in the middle of state primaries, forcing many officials to delay their elections by days, weeks and even months. They had to deal with a wave of poll worker cancellations, polling place changes and an explosion of absentee ballots.Voting rights groups are particularly concerned with the consolidations of polling places that contributed to long lines in Milwaukee, Atlanta and Las Vegas. They fear a repeat in November.As negotiations on the next COVID relief bill begin on Capitol Hill, the final figure for elections is sure to end up much less than the .6 billion envisioned by the House. That figure followed the recommendations of the Brennan Center to prepare for an influx of absentee ballots while providing more early voting options and protecting neighborhood polling places.Even before the pandemic, election offices typically work under tight budgets. Iowa Secretary of State Paul D. Pate, who serves as president of the National Association of Secretaries of State, said the group has been calling on the federal government to provide a steady source of funds, particularly to help address ongoing costs of protecting the nation’s election systems from cyberthreats.For Georgia’s primary last month, election officials spent .1 million of the roughly .9 million the state has received in federal funds. The money was used to send absentee ballot applications to 6.9 million active registered voters and print absentee ballots for county election offices. Some of it also was used to purchase PPE and secure drop-off boxes for counties.Meanwhile, the state elections division has seen a ,000 reduction for the current budget year as Georgia — like the rest of the nation — deals with a decline in revenues due to the pandemic.The state’s remaining federal funds will be used to help cover the costs of developing an online system for voters to request absentee ballots, a less expensive option than sending ballot applications to every voter, and exploring whether installing plexiglass dividers around voting machines could allow more voters in a polling place at one time.In Colorado, which is already a universal vote-by-mail state, the Denver election office has had to reduce its budget by 7.5%, which amounts to nearly 0,000. Jocelyn Bucaro, Denver’s elections director, said the federal funds sent earlier this year helped with purchasing PPE and other pandemic-related supplies.Iowa similarly spent its federal dollars on mail-in ballots and pandemic supplies, Pate said.Vote-by-mail veterans and vendors of the equipment, software, ballots and envelopes that will be needed in November say the window to buy them is quickly closing.“Right now, what I’m seeing in most places is just this kind of indecision. What are we supposed to be planning? Vote by mail or in-person or combination?” said Jeff Ellington, president of Runbeck Election Services, which prints ballots and the special envelopes used to mail them and also supplies high-volume envelope sorters.“Decisions just need to be made so people can start to put a plan into place,” he said.BlueCrest, a Pitney Bowes spinoff, sells high-volume sorting machines that handle up to 50,000 ballot envelopes per hour. That’s the kind of crunch big counties can expect to face on Nov. 3 in states including Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, where Rick Becerra, a vice president at the company, said he’s been talking to officials. The machines average 5,000 each.“I tell them the time is now,” he said.___Cassidy reported from Atlanta. Associated Press writer Frank Bajak in Boston contributed to this report. 6414

The Catholic Diocese of Youngstown released a list of names Tuesday of clergy personnel credibly accused of sexual abuse of a minor and who were reported to authorities.After a thorough investigation, Bishop George V. Murray, S.J., accepted the accusations as credible, according to the news release sent by the diocese.“I am very sorry that the Church has failed to act aggressively to eliminate this evil.  I humbly ask forgiveness from the victims and their families for the grave mistakes the Church has made," said Bishop Murray in the release.Through the investigation, Bishop Murray said, “that as painful as the process of voluntary disclosure of names is for parishioners where these men served, this is one way that we can offer support and dignity to the survivors of clergy sexual abuse and their families.”The following is a list of clergy members who had credible, substantiated allegations of sexual abuse of a minor made against them, according to the Catholic Diocese of Youngstown: 1022

The founder of the Women's March is calling for the movement's current co-chairs to step down for allowing bigotry into their mission.Teresa Shook, a lawyer and educator who founded the Women's March movement, accused the group's current co-chairs -- Bob Bland, Tamika Mallory, Linda Sarsour and Carmen Perez -- of associating with bigoted outside groups and tarnishing the Women's March's initial goals in a post on her Facebook page Monday.The co-chairs "have steered the Movement away from its true course. I have waited, hoping they would right the ship," Shook wrote. "But they have not. In opposition to our Unity Principles, they have allowed anti-Semitism, anti-LBGTQIA sentiment and hateful, racist rhetoric to become a part of the platform by their refusal to separate themselves from groups that espouse these racist, hateful beliefs.""I call for the current Co-Chairs to step down and to let others lead who can restore faith in the Movement and its original intent," Shook added. "I stand in Solidarity with all the Sister March Organizations, to bring the Movement back to its authentic purpose."The Women's March leaders swiftly shot back, crediting Shook for "creating a Facebook event named the Million Women's March" and lambasting her for not working to support the movement's ongoing growth."Today, Teresa Shook weighed in, irresponsibly, as have other organizations attempting in this moment to take advantage of our growing pains to try and fracture our network," the Women's March wrote in a post on its Facebook page. "Groups that have benefited from our work but refuse to organize in accordance with our Unity Principles clearly have no interest in building the world our principles envision. They have not done the work to mobilize women from diverse backgrounds across the nation.""Our ongoing work speaks for itself. That's our focus, not armchair critiques from those who want to take credit for our labor," the statement continued.The 2019 Women's March is slated for January, two years after the initial march that followed President Donald Trump's inauguration, and inspired countless sister marches nationwide.Shook's critique comes following longstanding criticism of the group's association with Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the black nationalist group Nation of Islam, who has made numerous anti-Semitic and homophobic comments.Mallory and Perez have both posted photos on Instagram of themselves with Farrakhan praising the National of Islam leader, and Sarsour spoke at the Justice or Else rally headlined by Farrakhan in 2015. Mallory, an African-American leader of the Women's March and anti-gun violence activist, attended a large event in February where Farrakhan stated that "the powerful Jews are my enemy."Mallory declined to denounce Farrakhan after the event. The Women's March released a statement emphasizing that Farrakhan's statements were "not aligned with the Women's March Unity Principles" and that "our external silence has been because we are holding these conversations and are trying to intentionally break the cycles that pit our communities against each other."Sarsour said that following the shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, critics suddenly called on the Women's March to denounce Farrakhan."There was nothing new that happened between Women's March and the Minister," Sarsour wrote in an online essay. "Folks decided to rehash 8 months ago."MPower Change, a Muslim organization that Sarsour co-founded, helped raise over 0,000 to cover the funeral expenses for the Tree of Life victims"This is not a letter in defense of Minister Farrakhan," she added. "He can do that for himself. We have been CRYSTAL CLEAR in BOTH of our statements that we REJECT antisemitism and all forms of racism. We have been CLEAR that Minister Farrakhan has said hateful and hurtful things and that he does not align with our Unity Principles of the Women's March that were created by Women of Color."A week before the Tree of Life shooting, Farrakhan made public anti-Semitic remarks, saying, "I'm not an anti-Semite. I'm anti-Termite." 4113

The decision to forego local bubbles was jointly recommended by NFL and NFLPA medical experts based on COVID testing data. They’re happy with the numbers and sticking with what works. Here’s the full memo, which also updates return to play protocols, etc. pic.twitter.com/GQxF0IF3jt— Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) December 15, 2020 345

The defense rested its case Tuesday morning in the trial against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort without calling any witnesses, setting the stage for closing arguments Wednesday morning.Manafort spoke for the first time in court during the trial, saying he will not testify.Manafort told Judge T.S. Ellis that he would not testify during a brief questioning at the podium before the jury was brought in the room. Manafort is not required to testify because of his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. Ellis made this clear during his brief conversation with Manafort."You have an absolute right to testify before this jury," Ellis said. "You have an absolute right to remain silent before this jury." 735