龙济医生(天津龙济中医治疗阳痿) (今日更新中)

The House has passed a .3 trillion spending package that will increase funding for the military and domestic spending and will keep the government funded through the end of September.The legislation passed with Democrats and Republicans coming together to pass it less than 24 hours after the 2,300-page bill was made public.Now, it's up to the Senate to pass it before the government runs out of money Friday at midnight. The Senate need unanimous consent -- meaning all members have to agree -- to bring the bill up for a timely vote. If one member objects, it could force the government into a brief shutdown. 622

The Olmsted Locks and Dam project, located on the Ohio River between Illinois and Kentucky, has taken 30 years and billion to complete.  But after three decades, the project is slated to be operational in October.The engineers and workers behind the development say the investment is worth it."The Ohio flows into the Mississippi 16 miles downriver from us, and then it's open passage all the way down to New Orleans and into the ocean,” explains Mick Awbreyk, the Army Corps of Engineers deputy chief for the Olmsted Division. “There is no locks and dams from the Olmsted to the ocean."He says the innovative details that went into the project are “phenomenal and truly world class.”Awbreyk will see the opening of the project, which began in 1988.So, why has it taken so long to complete?“The nature of the project; a lot of different things have led to the duration,” explains Awbreyk of the timeline. “One: it hasn't been fully funded until calendar 2013, fiscal years 2014 and that’s the nature of civil works projects."The dam crosses one of the busiest shipping lanes in the United States. Awbreyk says about 91 million tons of goods on average come through the area per year.“The equivalent of 25,000 semi-trucks worth of cargo passes through this site every year,” says Awbreyk. “You can imagine the wear and tear on the interstates and the highways that would have an extra 25,000 vehicles that will be on there per day."The project's price tag has grown to around billion. Workers here say it's money Americans will see come back to them."It’s widely important. The return on investment on this particular project is 0 million per year to the nation,” says Awbreyk. “That’s a net number, so ultimately it’s a little under a billion price tag; it will pay for itself in five years.” 1817

The Minneapolis City Council votes Friday on a proposal to change the city charter to allow elimination of the city’s police department, a radical move supported by a majority of the council after George Floyd’s death but far from assured.The vote is one step in a process that faces significant bureaucratic obstacles to make the November ballot, where the city’s voters would have the final say. And it comes amid a spate of recent shootings in Minnesota’s largest city that have heightened many citizens’ concerns about talk of dismantling the department.The Minneapolis force has come under heavy pressure since Floyd, a Black man in handcuffs, died May 25 after a police officer pressed his knee on Floyd’s neck for nearly eight minutes. Activists had long accused the department of being unable to change a racist and brutal culture, and earlier this month, a majority of the council proclaimed support for dismantling the department.Doing so would first require amending the city charter. Draft language of the amendment posted online would replace the department with a Department of Community Safety and Violence Prevention, “which will have responsibility for public safety services prioritizing a holistic, public health-oriented approach.”The amendment goes on to say the director of the new agency would have “non-law-enforcement experience in community safety services, including but not limited to public health and/or restorative justice approaches.” It also provides for a division of licensed peace officers, who would answer to the department’s director.Council members who support the change are looking to seize on a groundswell of support for significant policing changes following Floyd’s death. If they don’t get the charter change on the November ballot, their next chance won’t come until November 2021, they say.“It is time to make structural change,” Council Member Steve Fletcher said. “It is time to start from scratch and reinvent what public safety looks like.”The proposed amendment is expected to be approved Friday, but that’s just a first step. It goes then to a policy committee and to the city’s Charter Commission for formal review. The commission’s recommendation doesn’t bind the council, but it takes time.Barry Clegg, chairman of the Charter Commission, said the process feels rushed.“As I understand it, they are saying, ‘We are going to have this new department. We don’t know what it’s going to look like yet. We won’t implement this for a year, we’ll figure it out,’” Clegg said. “For myself anyway, I would prefer that we figured it out first, and then voted on it.”Clegg said that to get the proposed amendment question on the November ballot, it has to be finalized by Aug. 21. He said if the Charter Commission took its final action at its Aug. 5 meeting, there would likely be enough time for it to get passed by the full council, go through a veto period, and then, if vetoed, have time to spare for a possible mayoral veto override. Once on the ballot, the measure would go to voters.Mayor Jacob Frey doesn’t support abolishing the department, a stance that got him booed off the street by activists who demonstrated outside his house following Floyd’s death and demanded to know where he stood.Frey expressed concerns about the proposed amendment as currently drafted, including whether the change would eliminate police altogether or allow for a police presence going forward. He also said that when something currently goes wrong, the chief and the mayor are accountable — but under the new plan, accountability would be dispersed among 14 people. Frey also questioned whether policing practices would vary, based on ward or other factors.“There is a significant lack of clarity. And if I’m seeing a lack of clarity, so are our constituents,” said Frey, who has said he supports deep structural change in the existing department.Fletcher said under the new agency when someone calls 911, there will always be a response that’s appropriate, including the option for a response by employees authorized to use force. But he said the vast majority of calls that police officers currently take will be answered by employees with different expertise.Miski Noor, an organizer with Black Visions, criticized the proposed amendment for creating a division of licensed peace officers at all. She said it “would give current and former police way too much power to shape public safety in Minneapolis.”Steven Belton, president and chief executive of Urban League Twin Cities, said the way some council members went forward without a concrete plan is “irresponsible.”“The problem that needs to be stated up front, from my perspective, is racism. … I’m not sure what they are trying to fix here,” he said.Don Blyly, whose beloved science fiction and mystery bookstores were destroyed by arson in the unrest that followed Floyd’s death, said if local leaders do something “sufficiently stupid” when it comes to policing, he won’t reopen in Minneapolis.“There are legitimate problems with the Minneapolis police, but the way the politicians are going about it is just ridiculous,” Blyly said. “They are pandering to a certain segment of the electorate.” 5202

The National Rifle Association will host its annual convention this weekend, and on the first day of the convention, firearms will be barred from entering the Dallas facility hosting the NRA. According to a bulletin from the United States Secret Service, firearms, along with knives, laser pointers and a variety of other items will be banned from the facility. This is because Vice President Mike Pence is scheduled to appear on Friday. Civilians are generally prohibited from carrying weapons when the Vice President or President is present, and a meeting of the NRA is no exception. "Due to the attendance of the Vice President of the United States at the NRA-ILA Leadership Forum on Friday, May 4, the U.S. Secret Service will be responsible for event security around the Arena at the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center," a statement on the NRA's website said. "As a result, firearms and firearm accessories, knives or weapons of any kind will be prohibited in the forum prior to and during his attendance"CNN is also reporting that President Donald Trump will attend on Friday The firearm ban only extends for Friday's sessions, and not for Saturday or Sunday.Some survivors of the Parkland, Florida school shooting, and backers of the March for Our Lives movement said it is hypocritical that a group that decries gun control regulations won't be allowed to have its members carry weapons. "The NRA has evolved into such a hilarious parody of itself," Stoneman Douglas High School student said on Twitter in response to the weapon ban announcement. Leaders of the March for Our Lives have made the NRA a target of theirs, decrying politicians who accept campaign contributions from the group. "Wait wait wait wait wait wait you’re telling me to make the VP safe there aren’t any weapons around but when it comes to children they want guns everywhere?" Matt Deisch, leader of the March for Our Lives campaign, and a former Stoneman Douglas high school student, said on Twitter. "Can someone explain this to me? Because it sounds like the NRA wants to protect people who help them sell guns, not kids."A petition calling for Pence to cancel his appearance at the NRA convention has drawn nearly 45,000 virtual signatures. A similar firearm ban was enacted at last year's NRA Leadership Forum due to Trump's attendance.  2405

The political and judicial world were turned upside down on Friday following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. While many questions remain in Washington, like whether President Donald Trump has the votes to replace Ginsburg before the election, one thing is clear: issues will come before the Supreme Court very soon.HEALTH CARE ARGUMENTS IN NOVEMBERWhile election issues are expected, the future of the Affordable Care Act is an issue guaranteed to come up before the Supreme Court soon. A hearing is set to take place one week after the election regarding whether the law can be struck down. Essentially, Republicans from around the country believe that the only reason the Supreme Court upheld the law in 2012 was because the opinion said Congress has the power to tax. Since that time, however, Trump has removed the tax penalty for not having health insurance. The thinking from some conservatives is that since the tax penalty is gone, the entire law can be struck down now, too. WHERE THE COURT STANDS Prior to Ginsburg's death, the general thinking was that the law would still stand. It faced a challenged in 2012, but Chief Justice John Roberts sided with four liberal justices to uphold it. With Ginsburg's passing, there are only three liberal justices on the court. If Roberts joins the liberal justices it would create a 4-4 tie. "If there is a 4-4 split on the court, then no precedent is set and whatever the lower court decided stands," Professor Paul Schiff Berman with George Washington University said. That would mean parts of the Affordable Care Act can be struck down since lower courts have already ruled in that way. If Trump is able to get another nominee on the court before the hearing, it would only make the court more conservative. Berman cautioned though that other conservatives could potentially join the liberals on this case since the lawsuit's legal standing is murky. Still, the future of the Affordable Care Act is in more jeopardy today than it was last Thursday. 2020

来源：资阳报