武清龙济泌尿外科怎么样啊(男科医院天津武清龙济) (今日更新中)

The Trump administration is pushing back on a New York Times report that Education Secretary Betsy DeVos is looking into a plan that would allow states to use federal funding to buy firearms for teachers.On Wednesday, the Times reported that the Education Department was considering using a grant program called the Student Support and Academic Enrichment Program as a way to give federal funding for firearm purchases to states or school districts. The report cited multiple people with knowledge of the plan.A senior administration official told CNN that the idea laid out in the Times report did not originate with the Department of Education or DeVos. That official said the department received a letter from the Texas state Department of Education asking if the funds from a federal grant program could be used to purchase firearms. It was circulated to departmental lawyers and researchers for guidance, according to the official. The department ultimately chose not to respond, the official said.The official added that DeVos thinks that Congress should take action to clarify whether or not using the grant funding to buy guns is permissible. Moreover, the Education Department believes the grant program is intentionally vague to give school districts flexibility, and the idea of purchasing firearms was likely not considered when it was written, according to the official.In response to the Times report, Education Department spokeswoman Liz Hill told CNN that "the department is constantly considering and evaluating policy issues, particularly issues related to school safety. The secretary nor the department issues opinions on hypothetical scenarios."The discussion around arming teachers has been a deeply controversial one. President Donald Trump floated the proposal to arm educators and school staff on multiple occasions in the wake of the deadly school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida in February 2018."If you had a teacher who was adept with the firearm, they could end the attack very quickly," Trump said during a listening session on school safety a week after the shooting.The idea of arming school staff has been met with sharp condemnation.Former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords said in a statement Wednesday that "arming teachers is not a solution.""It recklessly puts American children in even more danger," she said in response to the Times report. "It's time for Americans to find the courage to take on the powerful and fight for our own safety."The American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association also lambasted the proposal. Nicole Hockley, whose six-year-old son was killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, took the microphone and told Trump she would rather arm teachers with ways to prevent shootings in the first place rather than with a firearm.Despite the criticism, Trump doubled down on the proposal on several subsequent occasions, and in March, the Trump administration proposed providing some school personnel with "rigorous" firearms training.In the wake of the Parkland shooting, the Trump administration also created a federal school safety commission, which is chaired by DeVos. In June, she testified before a congressional committee that the commission would not focus on looking at the role the role of guns in school safety. That stance was panned during a public forum. Democrats on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce have called on DeVos to explain how the commission will explore the role of guns."The Commission was charged with recommending policies and funding proposals to prevent school violence," 17 members of the committee wrote in a letter in June. "A core element of combating school violence is addressing gun violence, both in school and in our communities."The-CNN-Wire 3843

The risk of homelessness looms large for many across the country as people deal with job loss and economic uncertainty brought on by the coronavirus pandemic.The National Alliance to End Homelessness estimates, right now, there are 567,000 people who call the streets their home, a number that has only risen since March.There are shelters, soup kitchens, and myriad charities to help, but the group Foundations for Social Change, a charitable organization based in Vancouver, Canada, suggests one source of help trumps the rest: money.“Sometimes a little bit of a hand up can mean all the difference in whether or not someone is going to stabilize and get into housing or not,” said chief public policy officer for the Colorado Coalition for the Homeless Cathy Alderman.It might seem like an obvious solution, but it is challenged by the preconceived notion that people battling homelessness might squander the money or spend it on harmful habits like alcohol, drugs, or cigarettes.“I think it’s not surprising at all that people who are struggling with the cost of living and forced to sleep outside would use dollars given to them to get inside into a home,” said Alderman.In September, Foundations for Social Change wrapped up nearly two years of research that suggests those in less fortunate circumstances would use money to help secure food and housing, rather than illicit substances.Back in 2018, the group gave 50 people battling homelessness in Vancouver a lump sum of ,700, without restriction, to see what they would spend it on, and they compared the findings to a group of 60 homeless individuals who were not given any lump sum.Foundations for Social Change found that in the first month, the group that received the payment, 70 percent of them were able to access a sustainable food source that they maintained for the rest of the year. They also found stable housing at a rate that outpaced those who had not received the payments by 12 months.The researchers also found that spending on items like drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes decreased by 39 percent.“The key findings were phenomenal and were even well beyond my expectations,” said one of the head researchers, Dr. Jiaying Zhao. “This actually is counter to our common assumptions of how these folks will spend their money and cash, so that was very good to see.”“I would save a third, spend a third on things I know I needed, and then give a third away,” said Benjamin Dunning, who was homeless for nearly five years following the Great Recession in 2008. “There just wasn’t any work available and I was like, 'well, better dig in for the long haul.'"Dunning says following an injury that prevented him from working he was no longer able to afford rent in the Denver suburb where he lived. He says he moved from shelter to shelter, trying to weather the storm before he was able to find a community of other people in a similar situation that offered a little more stability and a consistent roof over his head.“One thing I found out is [the homeless people I was around] were just like my neighbors in the suburbs,” said Dunning. “Most of them were people who had gotten stuck on hard times and trying to figure out how to deal with it.”The study by Foundations for Social Change focused on people who had been homeless for a year or less and who had been screened for a low risk of mental health challenges and substance abuse. So, Dr. Zhao says this is not a silver bullet, but an encouraging sign to help solve an issue that has several layers of complexity. 3546

The wild is calling, and we're answering. Reserve yours 7.13.20. #FordBronco pic.twitter.com/2LEDH5FNtr— Ford Motor Company (@Ford) June 29, 2020 153

The top 10 has been reduced to seven.After airing live coast-to-coast on Sunday, three American Idol hopefuls were eliminated from the competition.(Spoiler alert: If you continue reading, you will learn who was eliminated from the competition.)After "millions" of votes were cast throughout the two-hour show, host Ryan Seacrest revealed that Ada Vox, Dennis Lorenzo and Melissa Sussette had not received enough votes to move on to the competition's next round.The judges looked shocked. Naturally, people took to Twitter to share their reactions.Here is a look at the Top 7: 593

The University of Florida's football team is suspending activities following an “increase” in COVID-19 cases among members of the team, the university announced on Tuesday.The announcement comes just days after head coach Dan Mullen called on the university to open Ben Hill Griffin Stadium to a full capacity of 90,000 for the rest of the season. The state of Florida currently does not have a capacity restriction on stadiums."I know our governor passed that rule, so certainly, hopefully the university administration decides to let us pack the Swamp against LSU … 100 percent, because that crowd was a major factor in the game,” Mullen said following last Saturday’s 41-38 loss against Texas A&M. “So, I certainly hope our university administration follows the governor. The governor has passed a rule that we're allowed to pack the Swamp and have 90,000 in the Swamp to give us the home-field advantage Texas A&M had."The stadium is currently open at 20% capacity.Athletics director Scott Stricklin said the suspension was out of an “abundance of caution.”Sports Illustrated reported that the Gators had five new coronavirus cases identified on Tuesday.As of Tuesday afternoon, this Saturday’s game between Florida and LSU is still on as scheduled. 1269

来源：资阳报