instruction:
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.
question:
Paragraph: "Sen. Barack Obama, speaking to veterans, lashed into his opponent for poor military judgment, alleging Sen. John McCain had fixated on Iraq immediately after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. ""Sen. McCain was already turning his sights to Iraq just days after 9/11, and he became a leading supporter of an invasion and occupation of a country that had absolutely nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, and that — as despicable as Saddam Hussein was — posed no imminent threat to the American people,"" Obama said on Aug. 19, 2008. ""Two of the biggest beneficiaries of that decision were al-Qaida's leadership, which no longer faced the pressure of America's focused attention; and Iran, which has advanced its nuclear program, continued its support for terror, and increased its influence in Iraq and the region."" Obama's analysis of the war's consequences aside, we checked the record to see whether he had fairly characterized McCain's views about Iraq after 9/11 and in the run-up to the war. As a military veteran and a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, McCain was a prominent voice in late 2001 as the nation grappled with how to respond to the attacks. On Sept. 12, 2001, he appeared on  Hardball with Chris Matthews,  where Matthews asked whether the appropriate response should be ""a legal matter or a military matter."" ""I think it's both,"" McCain replied. ""As — as we stated, the — a nation has the right to defend itself, No. 1. But No. 2, these organizations could not flourish effectively unless they had the help and assistance and safe harbor of these nations. And it isn't just Afghanistan — we're talking about Syria, Iraq, Iran, perhaps North Korea, Libya and others."" That comment was not particularly specific to Iraq. But in an Oct. 18, 2001, appearance on the  Late Show with David Letterman,  with the nation on edge about the anthrax mailings and in the early stages of the campaign in Afganistan, McCain singled out Iraq. After sharing his views about how events were unfolding in Afghanistan, McCain told Letterman: ""I think we'll do fine. The second phase — if I could just make one, very quickly — the second phase is Iraq. There is some indication, and I don't have the conclusions, but some of this anthrax may — and I emphasize may — have come from Iraq."" In January 2002, while touring the flight bridge of an aircraft carrier on the Arabian Sea, McCain shouted: ""Next up: Baghdad!"" He fleshed out his views in a speech at a NATO security policy conference in Munich on Feb. 2, 2002. ""Terrorist training camps exist on Iraqi soil, and Iraqi officials are known to have had a number of contacts with al-Qaida. These were probably not courtesy calls,"" he said. ""Americans have internalized the mantra that Afghanistan represents only the first front in our global war on terror. The next front is apparent, and we should not shrink from acknowledging it. A terrorist resides in Baghdad, with the resources of an entire state at his disposal, flush with cash from illicit oil revenues and proud of a decade-long record of defying the international community's demands that he come clean on his programs to develop weapons of mass destruction."" We should note that McCain suggested on several occasions that he would prefer alternatives to full-on invasion and occupation as a means of displacing Saddam Hussein, such as on  Meet the Press  on July 14, 2002: ""I have always strongly felt that you must try the option of opposition from within — arming, training, equipping and helping oppositions from within; the Kurds in the North, the Shiites in the South,"" McCain told the late Tim Russert. ""At least try that option before we send Americans into harm's way."" But two days later on  Face the Nation,  he made clear that if it took war to remove Hussein, he was all for it. ""Look, we need a regime change in Iraq,"" he said. ""If we can do it on the cheap by having operations involving just Special Forces and some air power and opponents within, either the Kurds in the south, Shiites in the north [sic], then that's fine. But we have to be prepared to do whatever is necessary to bring about this regime change. I think we also ought to prepare the American public in — in — by way of informing them that Saddam Hussein has these weapons, continues to attempt to improve the — their capability and would not be reluctant to export them to other countries."" He continued, ""So we need to keep telling the American people that as well, as well as basically — if I may be so blunt — frightening them — frightening and scaring them every day."" In early 2003, with calls for invasion of Iraq growing more insistent, McCain's was among the most fervent voices. ""Sept. 11, 2001 showed that al-Qaida is a grave threat,"" he wrote in a Feb. 14, 2003 opinion piece in  USA Today. ""Saddam Hussein has the ability to make a far worse day of infamy by turning Iraq into a weapons assembly line for al-Qaida's network. ... Saddam is an international felon who has repeatedly violated the terms of his parole and is planning further crimes with his terrorist accomplices. He must be brought to justice once and for all."" The record clearly supports the contention that McCain ""was already turning his sights to Iraq just days after 9/11"" — indeed he singled out Iraq on  Letterman  — and became a ""leading supporter"" of the war, as Obama said. We find his claim to be ." Claim: Sen. McCain was already turning his sights to Iraq just days after 9/11, and he became a leading supporter of an invasion and occupation of (Iraq).
answer:
McCain's record on Iraq: eager to attack


question:
Paragraph: Michelle Obama is visiting Tanzania on the last day of President Barack Obama’s eight-day tour of Africa. She helped Laura Bush open a summit of the wives of African leaders, saying Africa was “at the hub of global development”. The summit aims to promote women’s well-being on the continent. The unusual Obama-Bush combination spotlights U.S. interest in the continent and the importance of Africa to the legacy of the president and his predecessor George W. Bush. For Obama, his three-nation tour has given him a break from a row over spy agency eavesdropping and a chance to promote U.S. commercial interests to a receptive African audience. Bush, who launched a widely praised program to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa when in office, was due to join Obama for a ceremony to remember the victims of the 1998 U.S. embassy bombing in the Tanzanian capital. An expansion of a program to detect and treat cervical and breast cancer, Pink Ribbon Red Ribbon, is due to be announced on Wednesday, organizers said. Former President Bush is due to speak at the first ladies’ summit the same day. The United Nations and non-governmental groups, including Bush’s foundation, launched Pink Ribbon Red Ribbon to provide health services to women in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, building on the U.S. HIV/AIDS prevention program. Claim: Michelle Obama, Laura Bush spotlight Africa women's health.
answer:
U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama and predecessor Laura Bush combined their star power to draw attention on Tuesday to efforts to improve women’s health and welfare in east Africa.


question:
Paragraph: "Legislation to let counties set additional taxes on tobacco squeaked through the Oregon House last week on a 31-to-29 vote. Lawmakers opposed to higher taxes said it wasn’t fair to squeeze more revenue out of cigarette addicts. Lawmakers in support said smoking is a public health hazard and that local governments should be allowed to assert local control. Freshman Rep. Caddy McKeown, D-Coos Bay, said she too struggled with aspects of House Bill 2870, but then reeled off some disturbing statistics courtesy of the Coos County public health department, including this one: ""A baby in Coos County is two times as likely to be born to a mother who is someone who used tobacco during her pregnancy as is the average baby born in Oregon or the U.S.,"" she said. Twice as many smokers? What’s up, Coos County? Studies show that prenatal smoking puts babies at greater risk of low birth weight, respiratory illnesses and other potential health problems. State and county numbers McKeown’s office shared a 2011-12 annual report on the status of public health in Coos County. We also checked with Stephen Brown, a tobacco prevention program coordinator at Coos County. Figures from 2011 birthsshow that in Coos County, 23.4 percent of mothers used tobacco while pregnant. Statewide, the figure was 10.7 percent. That’s more than double. In real numbers, that means 135 of 577 babies born in Coos County in 2011 were born to smokers. Statewide, 4,795 of 45,136 babies born in 2011 were born to smokers. Brown says that studies show that people are less likely to smoke the higher their educational attainment. Prenatal tobacco use is greater among women who don’t finish high school than among women who graduate from college. People living in poorer households are more likely to smoke. Coos County lags the state in educational achievement and in per capita income. Certainly Coos is not the only county to post rates at least twice Oregon’s. Douglas and Josephine counties posted rates at 25 percent, and Lake County was the highest at 26.5 percent. Those are also rural counties similar to Coos in income and education demographics. Multnomah County was at 6.8 percent. National average A national average is harder to come by, mainly because not all states use the same ""certificate of live birth"" forms to collect prenatal information. The Annie E. Casey Foundation calculates a U.S. figure of 9 percent for births in 2010, but the number leaves out about 20 states. Oregon, which was included, was at 11 percent. Still, the average is backed up by a hefty Oregon Health Authoritydocument, which reports prenatal tobacco use across the country went from 13.6 percent in 1996 to 10.7 percent in 2005. In Oregon, the percentage of women smoking during pregnancy also dropped during that period, from 17.8 percent to 12.4 percent. The ruling: We can say with certainty that babies born in Coos County are twice as likely to have mothers who smoked during pregnancy than the average baby in Oregon. That also looks to be the case using older or incomplete national averages." Claim: "Caddy McKeown Says ""A baby in Coos County is two times as likely to be born to a mother who is someone who used tobacco during her pregnancy as is the average baby born in Oregon or the U.S."
answer:

Are babies born in Coos County twice as likely to be born to smokers?