宜宾微整鼻子大概多少钱(宜宾眼睑下垂矫正术) (今日更新中)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration says people would drive more and be exposed to increased risk if their cars get better gas mileage, an argument intended to justify freezing Obama-era toughening of fuel standards.Transportation experts dispute the arguments, contained in a draft of the administration's proposals prepared this summer, excerpts of which were obtained by The Associated Press.The excerpts also show the administration plans to challenge California's long-standing authority to enact its own, tougher pollution and fuel standards.Revisions to the mileage requirements for 2021 through 2026 are still being worked on, the administration says, and changes could be made before the proposal is released as soon as this week.RELATED: California sues over plan to scrap car emission standardsThe Trump administration gave notice earlier this year that it would roll back tough new fuel standards put into place in the waning days of the Obama administration. Anticipating the new regulation, California and 16 other states sued the Trump administration in May.Overall, "improvements over time have better longer-term effects simply by not alienating consumers, as compared to great leaps forward" in fuel efficiency and other technology, the administration argues. It contends that freezing the mileage requirements at 2020 levels would save up to 1,000 lives per year.New vehicles would be cheaper — and heavier — if they don't have to meet more stringent fuel requirements and more people would buy them, the draft says, and that would put more drivers in safer, newer vehicles that pollute less.RELATED: EPA moves to weaken Obama-era fuel efficiency standardsAt the same time, the draft says that people will drive less if their vehicles get fewer miles per gallon, lowering the risk of crashes.David Zuby, chief research officer at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, said he's doubtful about the administration's estimate of lives saved because other factors could affect traffic deaths, such as automakers agreeing to make automatic emergency braking standard on all models before 2022. "They're making assumptions about stuff that may or may not be the same," he said.Experts say the logic that heavier vehicles are safer doesn't hold up because lighter, newer vehicles perform as well or better than older, heavier versions in crash tests, and because the weight difference between the Obama and Trump requirements would be minimal.RELATED: President Trump, California clash over key issues"Allow me to be skeptical," said Giorgio Rizzoni, an engineering professor and director of the Center for Automotive Research at Ohio State University. "To say that safety is a direct result of somehow freezing the fuel economy mandate for a few years, I think that's a stretch."Experts say that a heavier, bigger vehicle would incur less damage in a crash with a smaller, lighter one and that fatality rates also are higher for smaller vehicles. But they also say that lighter vehicles with metals such as aluminum, magnesium, titanium and lighter, high-strength steel alloys perform as well or better than their predecessors in crash tests.Alan Taub, professor of materials science and engineering at the University of Michigan, said he would choose a 2017 Malibu over a heavier one from 20 years earlier. It's engineered better, has more features to avoid crashes and additional air bags, among other things. "You want to be in the newer vehicle," he said.RELATED: Nearly every governor with ocean coastline opposes Trump's drilling proposalAn April draft from the Trump administration said freezing the requirements at 2020 levels would save people ,900 per new vehicle. But the later draft raises that to ,100 and even as high as ,700 by 2025.Environmental groups questioned the justification for freezing the standards. Luke Tonachel, director of the clean-vehicle program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the risk from people driving more due to higher mileage is "tiny and maybe even negligible."Under the Trump administration proposal, the fleet of new vehicles would have to average roughly 30 mpg in real-world driving, and that wouldn't change through 2026.California has had the authority under the half-century-old Clean Air Act to set its own mileage under a special rule allowing the state to curb its chronic smog problem. More than a dozen states follow California's standards, amounting to about 40 percent of the country's new-vehicle market.Asked if he thinks a freeze in U.S. mileage standards is warranted, EPA acting administrator Andrew Wheeler told a small group of reporters at EPA headquarters last week, "I think we need to go where the technology takes us" on fuel standards.Wheeler did not elaborate. Agency spokespeople did not respond when asked specifically if the EPA acting chief was making the case that modern cars could be both fuel efficient and safe.Wheeler also spoke out for what he called "a 50-state solution" that would keep the U.S car and truck market from splitting between two different mileage standards.The Department of Transportation said in a statement that the final fuel economy standards would be based on sound science. The department cautioned that a draft doesn't capture the whole picture of the proposed regulation.The draft said a 2012 analysis of fuel economy standards under the Obama administration deliberately limited the amount of mass reduction necessary under the standards. This was done "in order to avoid the appearance of adverse safety effects," the draft stated.___Krisher reported from Detroit. 5642

WASHINGTON, D.C. – One hundred years after the 19th Amendment became law, eligible women voters could end up as the definitive political power in the 2020 election.“Women are the most consistent, reliable voting bloc across the country, across the elections, year in and year out,” said Jeanette Senecal with the League of Women Voters.The numbers bear that out. According to the Pew Research Center, women have outnumbered men in the voting booth in every presidential election since 1984.In 2016, 63% of eligible women voted, versus 59% of men.Those numbers have implications for both the Democratic and Republican parties, according to American University professor Jane Hall.“We are seeing a very striking acceleration of what has been a trend for some time, which is a gender gap between women voting for Democrats and men voting more for the Republican party,” Hall said.In the 2018 midterm elections, that gender gap became pronounced.Among registered voters, 50% of men identified as either Republican or leaning Republican, while 42% of men went with Democrats, a difference of 8%.Yet, among women, that gap more than doubled: 56% of women identified as Democrats, but only 38% with Republicans – a gap of 18%.How women choose to vote, though, is more complex than just two political parties, said Howard University political science professor Dr. Keesha Middlemass. There are differences in race and ethnicity, as well as levels of education and income.“We have to think about women as multiple blocs of voters,” Dr. Middlemass said. “They’re not a monolith.”That’s something the two presidential candidates seem to realize. President Donald Trump recently said he’s trying to appeal to what he calls “suburban housewives,” while Joe Biden picked a woman, California Senator Kamala Harris, as his running mate.“Anecdotally, talking to a lot of women: representation matters, seeing yourself there matters,” Hall said.What impact all of this has on the upcoming election remains to be seen.“Women want policies: ‘how are you going to make my life better?’ well, that requires policy,” Dr. Middlemass said. “But that whole idea of gender politics is going to be very evident in getting out the vote.”All of it is happening in an election where gender could tip the balance of power one way, or another. 2318

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Manhattan district attorney's office can see President Donald Trump’s tax returns and other financial records, but Congress cannot, at least for now.The two separate decisions were announced Thursday on the court’s final opinion day of its 2019-2020 term, which lasted more than a week longer than it historically does, likely because of the COVID-19 pandemic.The vote in both cases was 7-2. For the time being, the decisions will keep Trump’s long elusive tax returns and other documents out of the public eye. In the New York case, district attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. issued subpoenas for eight years’ worth of Trump’s business and personal tax records. Vance’s office says the records are needed for an investigation into hush-money payments made to two women who claimed they had affairs with Trump.In that case, justices rejected arguments by Trump’s lawyers that the president is immune from investigation while he holds office or that a prosecutor must show a greater need than normal to obtain the records.Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that “no citizen, not even the president, is categorically above the common duty to produce evidence when called upon in a criminal proceeding.” He added that Trump may still raise objections to the scope and relevance of the subpoenas.It’s not yet clear how much of the financial material will become public, if any. The records turned over in the Manhattan investigation are required to be kept secret at least until charges are filed.As for the congressional case, the justices ruled 7-2 to return the case to the lower courts, with no clear prospect for when the it might be resolved. The lower courts will consider separation of powers concerns. House committees issued subpoenas to Trump’s accounting firm and his major lenders last year in an effort to access several years of financial records. Lawmakers argued they needed the records to check the president’s financial disclosures and inform whether conflict-of-interest laws are tough enough, The Washington Post reports.The court’s ruling on the congressional subpoenas is short-term victory for the president, who has fought hard to keep his records private, especially leading up to the November election. 2283

WASHINGTON (AP) — The number of immigrants in the U.S. without legal status has declined to its lowest level in more than a decade, according to a new report released Tuesday.The nonpartisan Pew Research Center said 10.7 million immigrants lacked legal status in 2016, down from 11 million a year earlier and from a peak of 12.2 million in 2007 before the U.S. economy slumped.It is the lowest number since 2004, the report said.The decline stems largely from a drop in the number of Mexican immigrants living in the U.S. illegally to 5.5 million in 2016 from nearly 7 million in 2007. Some returned to their country to reunite with family, while others were deported.During the same period, the number of immigrants from Central America without legal status increased to nearly 1.9 million from 1.5 million.The report comes as the Trump administration has cracked down on immigration and bolstered security on the Southwest border, where thousands of Central American families have arrived to seek asylum.The report is based on U.S. Census Bureau data. It also noted an increase in the number of immigrants without legal status from India and Venezuela and a decrease in those from Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Korea and Peru.Overall, immigrants without legal status are less likely to be recent arrivals, said D'Vera Cohn, who co-authored the report.The report also notes that the number of legal immigrants grew to 34.4 million from 28.3 million over the nine-year period, and that more than half of the country's legal immigrants in 2016 were naturalized U.S. citizens. 1579

WEST ALLIS, Wisc. – A 15-year-old boy was arrested after he ran from police and hid in a tree in West Allis, Wisconsin.The incident started when West Allis Police was called to the 2000 block of S. 116th Street for a report of a disruptive teen -- who also possessed marijuana.According to police, the teen ran into Greenfield Park before they arrived at that address. Officers eventually located him, but the teen swam out to an island in the middle of a lagoon. He then climbed to the top of a tree and refused to come down.Police said the teen eventually came down and he was then arrested. 606

来源：资阳报