Generate an explanation for the given claim using the provided supporting material from the paragraph. Please consider the following points while generating an output. 1) The claim will always have supporting proof in the paragraph, and the paragraph will have a clear point of view supporting the claim. 2) There can be instances where direct correlation to the claim is not available. Make use of the sentences in the paragraph to provide a corresponding output supporting the claim. 3) The explanation should be at least one and at most twelve sentences long.

Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: The tentative settlement, which needs a judge’s approval, will provide compensation ranging from $2,500 up to $250,000 to women who say Dr. George Tyndall abused them between 1988 and 2016, USC Interim President Wanda Austin said in a statement . About 500 current and former students have now made accusations against Tyndall and filed various lawsuits. They contend he routinely made crude comments, took inappropriate photos, forced them to strip naked and groped them under the guise of medical treatment. Tyndall spent about three decades as a USC staff gynecologist before retiring last year after a university investigation concluded there was evidence that he sexually harassed students during exams. Tyndall has denied the allegations and has not been charged with a crime. Los Angeles police and Los Angeles County prosecutors are reviewing the claims. His attorney, Leonard Levine, said in a statement that Tyndall “continues to focus on the criminal investigation” and had no further comment. The proposed settlement applies to a pending federal class-action lawsuit that involves a fraction of the overall accusers but is open to every woman who ever had an appointment with the gynecologist. Three attorneys representing nearly 300 accusers say they’re strongly advising their clients against joining the federal action so they can fight in state court. “The only guaranteed number in this case is $2,500 — $2,500 won’t even get you a 50-yard-line seat at a USC football game, let alone compensate somebody for being sexually assaulted by their doctor when they were 18 or 17,” said John Manly, an attorney who represents 180 accusers. Attorney Gloria Allred, who represents 36 women who have accused Tyndall, said in a statement that the amount of money under the proposed settlement is “way too minimal” for what some of the women endured. Manly also criticized the proposed settlement as failing to hold USC accountable and called it an effort to cap future monetary damages. “We still don’t know when did USC first know, how often were they warned, what administrators were involved, was there criminal conduct?” Manly said. “Our clients, more than anything, want those answers and people held accountable, not because it helps their case but to protect the future women at USC.” Tara Lee, an attorney who represents USC, said questions regarding potential criminal conduct are being investigated “and those answers will be available when the investigation itself is completed.” “The settlement process they’re criticizing would not provide for that,” she said. “The settlement process would be very victim-focused to address their needs and make sure they have their claims identified and awarded.” Under the proposal, any woman who had an appointment with Tyndall will get $2,500. Those who submit written claims detailing their allegations and the impact on their lives would be eligible for between $7,500 and $20,000. Women who agree to further detail their allegations in a private interview with a psychologist could see damages of up to $250,000. Lee said the school tried to create a system that would allow women to decide how much to engage in the process. Attorney Mike Arias, who represents 80 accusers, criticized the speed of the proposed settlement, saying he and other attorneys were expecting USC to disclose more information. “USC may quell the depth of the anger and upset by getting hundreds of other victims to join the settlement, but it’s not going to be over,” Arias said, adding that he and other attorneys will fight the settlement’s approval. The university was first criticized in the case after the Los Angeles Times reported earlier this year that complaints about Tyndall’s care went unheeded for decades and that USC failed to report him to the medical board even after quietly forcing him to retire. Two administrators were fired, and President C.L. Max Nikias stepped down following the criticism. USC has denied accusations of a cover-up. Austin said that since she became interim university president, “a fair and respectful resolution for as many former patients as possible has been a priority for the university and for me personally.” “Many sweeping changes have been made and we continue to work every day to prevent all forms of misconduct on our campuses,” her statement said. On Thursday, 93 women who say Tyndall abused or harassed them announced the latest lawsuit against USC, saying it ignored decades of complaints. Dana Loewy said Tyndall assaulted her during an exam in 1993. “I am part of an accidental sisterhood of hundreds of women because the university we love betrayed our trust,” she said. ___ Associated Press writers John Antczak and Brian Melley in Los Angeles contributed to this report. Claim: USC agrees to pay $215M to settle doctor sex abuse claims.

Output: The University of Southern California said Friday that it would pay $215 million to settle claims of sexual abuse and harassment by a school gynecologist, but lawyers for hundreds of the accusers say it’s not enough money and the university has yet to fully disclose what it knew about the doctor’s behavior.


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: As social media users expressed alarm over United States President Donald Trump’s administration’s apparent efforts to sabotage the U.S. Postal Service (USPS), one Twitter user’s suggestion caught traction on August 14 2020.That account wrote:Heard this from a postal worker- IF you return your ballot BUT place 2 First Class stamps on it (instead of the business reply free postage provided) the USPS MUST deliver your letter AS First Class BECAUSE you PAID for First Class! It CANNOT be put into Bulk Mail! DO IT!A spokesperson for the Portland, Oregon chapter of the American Postal Workers Union — which represents more than 200,000 current and retired USPS workers — confirmed to us that using one first-class stamp would be enough to ensure that a mail-in ballot would be sorted individually.“One 55-cent stamp will get it where it’s supposed to go,” she said.For some voters, the issue could be moot; a USPS staffer told us that because state and local election boards have the ability to design their own ballots and election materials, some boards may already be paying for them to have them classified as first-class mail.The USPS has urged voters to use first-class mail “or an expedited level of service” to send their ballots in, and to be clear on the submission requirements for their local jurisdictions. An agency spokesperson told the Salt Lake City Tribune in a statement:The Postal Service recommends that domestic, nonmilitary voters mail their ballots at least one week prior to their state’s due date to allow for timely receipt by election officials.The Los Angeles Times reported that there is a difference in processing times between regular mail-in ballots and first class mail:Election officials typically use marketing mail (or nonprofit bulk) to send out ballots, which is cheaper than using first class mail. The delivery timelines, however, are different: Marketing mail takes three to 10 days, while first class mail is delivered in two to five days. The postal service has traditionally treated election mail with priority, even if it’s not sent first class.But USPS General Counsel Thomas Marshall implied in letters to election officials that marketing mail delivery standards would be enforced for election mail.“Using Marketing Mail will result in slower delivery times and will increase the risk that voters will not receive their ballots in time to return them by mail,” Marshall wrote in language later repeated in [a USPS] statement.Democratic Party Sen. Chuck Schumer, though, has accused the USPS of price-gouging voters.“The postal service has informed some states they may need to pay a first class rate to deliver ballots rather than the normal rate, nearly tripling the cost at a time when people will have to vote by mail in record numbers because they can’t or won’t go vote in person,” he wrote on August 11, 2020. “This would be an outrageous policy that should alarm every American. Democrats will fight this with every tool at our disposal.”According to the Washington Post, the agency also sent letters to 46 states and the District of Columbia informing them that it could not guarantee that ballots sent by mail would arrive in time to be counted for the November 3 2020 general election:Some states anticipate 10 times the normal volume of election mail. Six states and D.C. received warnings that ballots could be delayed for a narrow set of voters. But the Postal Service gave 40 others — including the key battleground states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Florida — more-serious warnings that their long-standing deadlines for requesting, returning or counting ballots were “incongruous” with mail service and that voters who send ballots in close to those deadlines may become disenfranchised.The only states to not receive the warnings from USPS were Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, and Rhode Island.The Twitter post was shared more than 8,000 times on the platform amid escalating concerns over the United States Postal Service’s autonomy and ability to handle voting by mail amid the COVID-19 pandemic following the appointment of Louis DeJoy — a fundraiser for Trump — as Postmaster General in June 2020. Hours after the tweet began spreading online, CNN reported that the agency’s inspector general launched an investigation into DeJoy’s actions since taking the position, in response to calls by Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren.The Massachusetts lawmaker had asked the inspector general to investigate not just DeJoy’s new policies for the USPS but whether he had “met all ethics requirements.” DeJoy reportedly still owns a $30 million stake in a separate company that is a USPS contractor and bought stock in Amazon, which operates a delivery service that competes with the agency.Criticism of DeJoy intensified following reports of several mailboxes being removed from use in Portland, Oregon (which the USPS attributed to an overall decline in outgoing mail) and the decommissioning and dismantling of 671 mail-sorting machines around the U.S., which the Post reported had the capacity to sort a combined 21.4 million pieces of paper mail per hour.The American Postal Workers Union, which represents more than 200,000 current and retired USPS employees, filed a grievance over the scuttling of the sorting machines. But union president Mark Dimondstein expressed confidence to the newspaper that his colleagues could still handle the expected surge in mail-in voting in November.“Piece of cake for postal workers,” he said.DeJoy released a statement on August 18 2020 saying that he would suspend what he called “longstanding operational initiatives” that had raised concern from the public until after the election.“I want to assure all Americans of the following: Retail hours at Post Offices will not change,” the statement read. “Mail processing equipment and blue collection boxes will remain where they are. No mail processing facilities will be closed. And we reassert that overtime has, and will continue to be, approved as needed.”But the skepticism toward DeJoy did not subside; a day after the USPS posted his statement, WOOD-TV in Michigan reported that mail sorting machines inside the agency’s office in downtown Grand Rapids were being dismantled per an order from him.Internal sources say mail sorting machines are being dismantled at downtown GR post office. Process started yesterday. Order came from Postmaster General DeJoy. @WOODTV pic.twitter.com/tNm9pXjcnU— Heather Walker (@_HeatherWalker) August 19, 2020Three hours after their initial report, WOOD said that the dismantling had stopped.That same day, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi released a statement criticizing DeJoy for not reversing course on the actions he had already taken since taking over the USPS.“The Postmaster General frankly admitted that he had no intention of replacing the sorting machines, blue mailboxes and other key mail infrastructure that have been removed and that plans for adequate overtime, which is critical for the timely delivery of mail, are not in the works,” Pelosi said. “All of these changes directly jeopardize the election and disproportionately threaten to disenfranchise voters in communities of color. At the same time, we are highly concerned that the slowdown of the delivery of medicines to veterans is not being sufficiently addressed.”Trump himself admitted in a Fox News interview that his administration was holding up an agreement with Democratic Party lawmakers over a new stimulus package over the inclusion of $3.5 billion in USPS funding.“They need that money in order to make the post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots,” he said. “Now, if we don’t make a deal, that means they don’t get the money. That means they can’t have universal mail-in voting, they just can’t have it.”Did Trump Say That Without a Deal ‘They Can’t Have Universal Mail-in Voting, They Just Can’t Have It’?The suggestion to use first-class mail also gained visibility following the spread of similar posts (presented as “an inside tip from a postal worker”) urged voters to personally take their ballots to their local election boards or polling sites:‘Don’t Mail Ballots In, Drop at Board of Elections, This is an Inside Tip from a Postal Worker, Can’t Say More than That’Trump has repeatedly claimed — entirely falsely — that mail-in voting would lead to a “rigged” election. But both he and First Lady Melania Trump used absentee ballots to vote by mail in Florida. At least fifteen other officials in his administration have done the same.Update August 19, 2020 1:27 p.m. PST: Updated with notes on additional mail sorting machine scuttling and statements from Louis DeJoy and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.Comments Claim: Mail-in voters in the United States can send their ballots with first-class postage to ensure that it is delivered on time before the November 3 2020 election.

Output: Can You Have Your Mail-In Ballot Delivered as First Class Mail?


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: In January, China approved imports of a new genetically modified soybean variety — Enlist E3 soybeans jointly made by Corteva Agriscience, a division of DowDupont and seed company MS Technologies — that can withstand the herbicide 2,4-D. “This is great news for U.S. soybean growers,” said Joseph Merschman, president of MS Technologies in a February press release. “This announcement clears the way for even more soybean growers to experience the high-yielding elite genetics and exceptional weed control offered by the Enlist E3 soybean system.” DowAgrosciences declined to comment for this story. ___ The nonprofit news outlet Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting provided this article to The Associated Press through a collaboration with Institute for Nonprofit News. ___ The herbicide — 2,4-D — was one of the active ingredients in Agent Orange and has been shown to drift miles away from where it’s applied. The U.S. used Agent Orange during the Vietnam War to eliminate crops and forest covers for enemy troops. The International Agency for Research on Cancer named the weed killer a possible human carcinogen. Studies have also linked 2,4-D to endocrine disruption, disturbing estrogen, androgen and thyroid hormones. Over the past two decades, a growing number of weeds have become resistant to glyphosate, the most popular weed killer in the world, sold as Monsanto’s Roundup. In response, agribusiness companies, like Dow and Monsanto, have introduced new genetically modified varieties of soybeans that can be sprayed with other herbicides that kill glyphosate-resistant weeds. The United States exports $14 billion worth of soybeans to China, or one of every four rows of soybeans, annually, according to the American Soybean Association, an organization of soybean producers. Trade tensions with China and higher import taxes on U.S. soybeans have thwarted imports recently. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has projected that increased 2,4-D use due to the Enlist system would likely increase the amount of the weed killer sprayed between 200 and 600 percent by 2020. Already, it’s one of the most commonly used herbicides in the United States, used in conventional agriculture including corn and is one of the most commonly used home and garden herbicides. In 2016, the USDA estimated that farmers used 44.4 million pounds of 2,4-D on crops across the U.S. “This is just going to absolutely be a disaster,” said Nathan Donley, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity, a nonprofit organization that works to protect endangered species. The Enlist approval gives farmers looking to manage glyphosate-resistant weeds a new tool at a time when the dominant soybean system — Monsanto’s Roundup Ready 2 Xtend soybeans — has caused widespread issues in the Midwest and South. Those soybeans are genetically engineered to withstand being sprayed by dicamba, a volatile herbicide that has drifted off target and damaged millions of acres of non-resistant soybeans, other crops and natural areas since the Environmental Protection Agency approved new versions of the weed killer for use on soybeans in November 2016. More than 90 percent of soybeans grown in the United States are genetically modified, but there are only three major systems that are commonly used to combat glyphosate-resistant weeds: Monsanto’s Xtend, DowDupont’s Enlist and BASF’s LibertyLink soybeans, which are resistant to glufosinate, another herbicide. Enlist soybeans can also be sprayed with glufosinate. The extent to which 2,4-d-resistant soybeans will be planted is unknown, largely because of the widespread market penetration by dicamba-resistant soybeans. Company officials estimated the product will have at least 10 percent market share by 2020, which would be about 9 million acres in the United States. In two years, dicamba went from being sprayed on zero acres of soybeans to more than 40 million acres. Aaron Hager, an associate professor at the University of Illinois, said many farmers have adopted Monsanto’s Xtend soybeans as a protection measure against drift from dicamba. “It’s going to be difficult for (Enlist) to gain market penetration partially because of how well entrenched dicamba already is,” Hager said. The main question for farmers considering Enlist is whether drift from dicamba will damage Enlist soybeans, said Charles Benbrook, a visiting professor at the University of Newcastle who has spent decades studying pesticides at various institutions. “One of the huge questions is, is there any cross resistance? Will they be any less vulnerable to damage from drifting dicamba and vice versa?” Benbrook said. Benbrook said they may be able to coexist. Though 2,4-D and dicamba are different pesticides, their similarities might allow some cross-resistance in genetically modified soybeans, Benbrook said. Both dicamba and 2,4-D have been used for decades on other crops but at a smaller scale. Both are broadleaf herbicides that kill plants in similar ways, mimicking natural plant hormones called auxins and causing abnormal growth. Like the new version of dicamba, the new 2,4-D strain approved for usage on soybeans is designed to be less volatile than past versions. If there is no cross-resistance, Benbrook projected that Corteva, a division of DowDupont, and Bayer, which owns Monsanto, will likely have to come up with a deal to put the resistant genes in both company’s systems, increasing the price for farmers. Donley said both herbicides, having similar modes of actions and a propensity to drift, will insert an element of doubt on what caused drift damage. States across the Midwest and South have received a record number of pesticide misuse complaints from farmers since dicamba was allowed on soybeans. Already, some scientists have speculated that 2,4-D is causing some of the alleged dicamba damage. “Industry is going to use this to say, ‘how do you know it’s our product?’” Donley said. “It’s going to enable the industry to do what they do best, which is sow doubt in the public.” Environmental groups argue the transition to 2,4-D-resistant soybeans, and the increased spraying that goes along with it, is indicative of the problems with industrial agriculture. Jennifer Sass, senior scientist at the Natural Resource Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group, has researched the human health effects of 2,4-D, and said that the herbicide can cause disruptions in the endocrine system. She said that the link to cancer isn’t quite as established. Though 2,4-D is considered a “possible carcinogen,” the research isn’t quite as strong, but that’s because of the difficulties in collecting data, she said. “Those are all data and red flags, but there’s so many reasons to get off this treadmill. Waiting for more confidence in the cancers means waiting for more farmers and pesticide applicators to get cancer, and I don’t think anyone wants to collect our data that way,” Sass said. In some places, some types of glyphosate-resistant weeds, like Palmer amaranth, are already becoming resistant to 2,4-D and dicamba. Bill Freese, a senior scientist at the Center for Food Safety, which is a nonprofit group focused on the environmental effects of food production, said, in addition to human health issues, more spraying will lead to environmental issues, like the killing of pollinators and wild plants, he said. Donley, at the Center for Biological Diversity, has documented those problems with glyphosate and dicamba, especially when it comes to monarch butterflies and milkweed. He said more spraying will lead to more resistance and new herbicides. “It’s a poor answer to a complex situation, and it’s going to be getting worse,” Donley said. “In five-to-10 years, we’re going to be looking for the next herbicide. History tells us what’s going to happen in this case. It’s kind of crazy we’re even considering going here.” Claim: Last year it was dicamba, this year it’s 2,4-D.


Output: A volatile weed killer linked to cancer and endocrine issues will likely be sprayed on millions more acres of soybeans and cotton across the Midwest and South starting this year.