Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.

A popular meme appearing in January 2019 presented a series of statements attributed to U.S. President Donald Trump on the topic of abortion. The meme, with its judicious use of quotation marks, accurately reflected excerpts of Trump’s videotaped remarks to be shown in conjunction with the 18 January 2018 March for Life:  However, these excerpts were presented out of order and in one case repeated the same section of text twice, reflecting a certain amount of artistic license. Presented below are Trump’s full remarks, with the relevant sections highlighted and numbered to reflect the four excerpts, and their order, as presented in the meme:  I am very proud to welcome tens of thousands of families, students, and people of all faiths and backgrounds to our nation’s capital for the 46th annual March For Life. This is a movement founded on love and grounded in the nobility and dignity of every human life. When we look into the eyes of a newborn child, we see the beauty and the human soul and the majesty of God’s creation (4). We know that every life has meaning and that (4) every life is worth protecting (3, 4), As president, I will always defend the first right in our Declaration of Independence — the right to life. During my first week in office, I reinstated the Mexico City Policy. We have taken bold action to protect the religious freedoms for doctors, nurses, and charities like the Little Sisters Of The Poor We issued a new proposal to prohibit Title Ten taxpayer funding from going to any clinic that performs abortions. We are supporting the loving choice of adoption and foster care, including through the support of faith-based adoption services. And I am supporting the U.S. Senate’s effort to make permanent the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits taxpayer funding for abortion in spending bills. Today I have signed a letter to Congress to make clear that if they send any legislation to my desk that weakens the protection of human life, I will issue a veto. (1) And we have the support to uphold those vetoes. Every child is a sacred gift from God (2). As this year’s March For Life theme says, each person is unique from Day One. That is a very important phrase. Unique from Day One. And so true. I want to thank Americans who traveled all across the country to march for life, and I especially want to thank so many young people who give us hope for the future. Together we will work to save the lives of unborn children, so they have a chance to live and to love, to thrive and to dream, and to bless our nation and reach their full and glorious potential. Thank you. God bless you and your families, and God bless America.
President Donald Trump said: “I have signed a letter to Congress to make clear that if they send any legislation to my desk that weakens the protection of human life, I will issue a veto … Every child is a sacred gift from God … Every life is worth protecting … We know that every life has meaning and that every life is worth protecting.”

Under the agreement, Emergent BioSolutions will no longer enforce a contract that had allowed it to be the only company to develop a nasal spray version of the drug nalmefene for use as an antidote in a nasal spray. The attorney general’s office said the new agreement came after it found that Adapt Pharma, which has since been bought by Rockville, Maryland-based Emergent, had the exclusive rights to sell the drug using Aptar Pharma’s nasal spray technology. The drug is still in the pipeline and is not on the market, though. “Given the tragic, devastating effects of the opioid crisis, and the urgent need for additional drugs for the emergency treatment of opioid overdoses, my office will do whatever possible to ensure that there are no unnecessary impediments to the development of additional life-saving opioid overdose reversal drugs,” Attorney General Letitia James said in a written statement. The agreement with James’s office does not affect Narcan, a spray version of the drug naloxone now sold by Emergent. That from is popular for police, firefighters and others to use to try to revive people who are overdosing. It is not subject to an exclusivity agreement on the spray technology. Narcan retails for about $140 for two doses, but the company sells that amount to first responders for $75. More than 400,000 deaths in the U.S. since 2000 have been linked to opioids, a class of drugs that includes heroin, fentanyl, and prescription painkillers such as Vicodin and OxyContin. Companies would still need Food and Drug Administration approval before their products could be on the market. There is at least one effort to introduce a generic version of a naloxone nasal spray. Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, announced a grant in 2018 for a nonprofit drug company to develop one. ___ This story has been updated to correct that the drug at the center of the agreement is a spray version of nalmefene that is under development, not naloxone. It also clarifies that Narcan is sold to first responders for a lower-than-retail price.
Deal will let more companies make an overdose antidote spray.

"In just over 24 hours, some 12,000 people shared a post from the Kenosha County Democratic party slamming the coronavirus vote by Wisconsin’s Republican congressional delegation. The emergency measure — which includes free testing for COVID-19, paid emergency leave and other emergency appropriations — easily passed both houses of Congress and was signed into law by President Donald Trump on March 18, 2020. But it passed without much help from Wisconsin. The Kenosha Democrats seized on that fact in a March 19, 2020, Facebook post. The post explained the bill, commented on gerrymandering and noted the GOP no votes from purple Wisconsin went beyond the breakdown from even the deepest red of the red states. It was accompanied by a graphic with pictures of U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson and U.S. Reps. Mike Gallagher, Glenn Grothman, Jim Sensenbrenner and Bryan Steil that said this: ""WI is the ONLY state where all Republicans voted against protecting its citizens."" This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Let’s check it out. The bill passed 363-40 in the U.S. House and 90-8 in the U.S. Senate. Indeed, all five Republicans in the Wisconsin delegation cast a no vote, according to roll calls published by ProPublica. All four state Democrats voted for the bill. And, yes, that clean sweep of Republican votes was unique around the country. In Oklahoma both Republican senators voted against the bill, but two of three Republican representatives supported it. Iowa’s lone Republican representative voted no, but both Republican senators there supported the bill. That leaves us to look at the characterization that Wisconsin Republicans ""voted against protecting (the state’s) citizens""? Like anything in politics, it’s more complicated than that. In various statements issued after the votes, the state’s Republican lawmakers didn’t object to the concept of providing help amid the pandemic, but they took issue with numerous specifics in the bill and how the process was handled. Sensenbrenner objected to spending money on a bill that he said stretched 100 pages and was presented with less than 30 minutes to review. ""We do not know the full cost of this legislation,"" he said in a statement. ""I am not a fan of passing bills to find out what is in them."" Steil told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel he voted against the bill because it ""places a heavy government mandate on Wisconsin small businesses that are already suffering negative consequences from coronavirus."" Gallagher echoed those comments in a statement, saying he feared the bill would hurt small businesses. ""This bill, while well-intentioned, contains a number of unclear provisions that could force small businesses in Northeast Wisconsin to lay off workers or cause them to close their doors altogether,"" Gallagher said. ""Let me be clear: H.R. 6201 contained a number of good provisions like free testing that we’ve already successfully fought for. But I have serious questions as to whether the best way to support those needing paid and sick leave is through tax credits to small businesses instead of direct payments to those affected."" Lori Hawkins, chair of the Kenosha County Democratic Party, defended the description in the Facebook post. She said the bill guided both testing and treatment to help control the spread of the disease. ""A 'no' vote by our elected officials was a vote against protecting their constituents from this highly contagious disease which has already been deadly to residents in Wisconsin,"" she said in an email. A viral Facebook post said Wisconsin ""is the only state where all Republicans voted against protecting its citizens."" It is indeed the only state where all Republicans opposed the bill, which has now become law. But it’s a bit of an exaggeration to summarize their decisions as a vote ""against protecting (Wisconsin) citizens."" And of course this is expected to be just the first of many bills addressing the coronavirus fallout."

“Wisconsin is the only state where all Republicans voted against protecting its citizens.”