天津武清区龙济泌尿网天津市武清区龙济医院做包皮好吗,龙济医院做包皮手术行吗,天津武清龙济泌尿专车医院,武清龙济男科医院做包皮手术,天津武清区龙济医院重点,天津市武清区龙济男士专科,武清龙济治疗一次费用多少

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) — California would become the first state to require businesses to offer electronic receipts unless customers ask for paper copies under legislation proposed on Tuesday.Many businesses and consumers already are moving toward e-receipts, said Democratic Assemblyman Phil Ting of San Francisco.But he said a law still is needed because many consumers don't realize most paper receipts are coated with chemicals prohibited in baby bottles, can't be recycled and can contaminate other recycled paper because of the chemicals known as Bisphenol-A (BPA) and Bisphenol-S (BPS).His bill, AB161, would require all businesses to provide proof of purchase receipts electronically starting in 2022 unless the customer asks for a printed copy.RELATED: City Council votes to ban Styrofoam across San DiegoIt comes days after another first-in-the-nation California law took effect requiring dine-in restaurants to provide drinking straws only at customers' request.The penalties in Ting's bill are modeled on the straw bill, said Nick Lapis of Californians Against Waste. It calls for written warnings for the first two violations and a fine of a day for subsequent infractions, with a 0 cap."It's intended to be a pretty light touch in terms of enforcement," Lapis said.Advocates said the use of straws is declining after that law was passed.Many larger stores already offer the choice involving receipts but it is unclear if a mandate would cause a hardship for small and medium-size stores, said California Retailers Association spokeswoman Pamela Williams. Her association and the California Chamber of Commerce have not taken positons on the bill.Ting said businesses can save money by moving away from printed receipts.The advocacy group Green America, which is pushing a "skip the slip" campaign, estimated that millions of trees and billions of gallons of water are used annually to produce paper receipts in the United States.Ting cited studies by the Environmental Working Group and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that retail workers have higher concentrations of BPA or BPS than those who do not have regular contact with receipts.Ting said consumers can still request paper receipts if they are worried about giving out their email addresses for privacy reasons or to avoid having their emails used or sold for marketing purposes. 2382

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — A federal appeals court ruled Friday the Trump administration acted in an "arbitrary and capricious" manner when it sought to end an Obama-era program that shields young immigrants from deportation.A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2 to 1 that the Trump administration violated federal law when it tried to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program without adequately explaining why. The ruling overturns a lower court ruling a judge in Maryland made last year, which Trump had previously praised via Twitter.Friday's ruling will not have any immediate effect as other federal courts have already ordered that DACA be kept in place.The 4th Circuit ruling said the Department of Homeland Security did not "adequately account" for how ending DACA program would affect the hundreds of thousands of young people who "structured their lives" around the program."We recognize the struggle is not over and there are more battles to fight in the Supreme Court on this road to justice, but our families are emboldened by knowing that they are on the right side of history," said Gustavo Torres, executive director of Casa de Maryland, the lead plaintiff in the case.Trump and his Justice Department have argued that the Obama administration acted unlawfully when it implemented DACA. The Justice Department declined to comment.Preserving DACA is a top Democratic priority, but discussions between Trump and Democrats on the issue have gone nowhere.Trump's latest immigration plan, unveiled Thursday, does not address what to do about the hundreds of thousands of young immigrants brought to the U.S. as children. White House press secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters that "every single time that we have put forward or anyone else has put forward any type of immigration plan that has included DACA it's failed."DACA's fate could be decided by the Supreme Court, which is weighing the Trump administration's appeals of other federal court rulings.The justices have set no date to take action.If the high court decides it wants to hear the appeals, arguments would not take place before the fall. That means a decision is not expected until 2020, which could come in the thick of next year's presidential contest.___Associated Press writer Mark Sherman in Washington contributed to this report. 2362

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Governor Jerry Brown has agreed to deploy 400 National Guard troops at President Donald Trump’s request, according to the Associated Press.Brown specified that not all the troops will head to the U.S.-Mexico border and none will enforce federal immigration enforcement.The troops will focus on fighting drug crime, firearms smuggling and human tracking, a letter sent to the Trump by Brown Wednesday said.RELATED: Trump signs memo sending National Guard to secure border?"Combating these criminal threats are priorities for all Americans --Republicans and Democrats," Brown wrote. "That's why the state and the Guard have long supported this important work and agreed to similar targeted assistance in 2006 under President Bush and in 2010 under President Obama.""But let's be crystal clear on the scope of this mission," Brown wrote. "This will not be a mission to build a new wall. It will not be a mission to round up women and children or detain people escaping violence and seeking a better life. And the California National Guard will not be enforcing federal immigration laws."Governors in the border states of Texas, Arizona and New Mexico have already deployed troops to the border. Until Wednesday, California was the only state that didn’t respond to Trump’s request.RELATED: Texas Governor Greg Abbott to send additional National Guard troops to Mexico border?Trump has said he wants up to 4,000 troops to be sent to the border to combat illegal immigration and drug trafficking.Brown said the deployment will happen pending review and approval of the federal government. 1613

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Democratic-controlled state Legislature have agreed on a budget deal that would to cover the state's estimated .3 billion deficit. Newsom and legislative leaders announced the agreement Monday. Sources with knowledge of the plan said it avoids permanent cuts to public schools and health care programs. But it also imposes .8 billion in salary cuts to state workers. In a joint statement, Newsom and the leaders of the Senate and Assembly say the agreement protects core services including education, health care and the social safety net. California's revenue has tanked during the coronavirus pandemic because of a statewide stay-at-home order. 722