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.

Example Input: "As the 2014 New Hampshire Senate race veers toward a conclusion, the state’s next senator needs the support of women voters. Incumbent Jeanne Shaheen underscored that point when she targeted Republican challenger Scott Brown’s record supporting women’s reproductive rights during his tenure as a state senator from Massachusetts. Her aim was to undercut Brown’s assertion that he is a pro-choice politician. An ad with a female narrator released on Oct. 7 said, ""In Massachusetts, Scott Brown pushed for a law to force women considering abortion -- force them -- to look at color photographs of developing fetuses."" The ad, titled ""Force,"" drew a swift response from Brown. He held a press conference the same day the ad was released, calling it a lie and adding that it was ""not only insensitive, it is also deeply offensive."" ""I have always been a pro-choice, independent Republican and have a strong record of supporting women’s health care,"" Brown said in Derry, N.H., with his wife Gail by his side. Brown demanded that Shaheen pull the ad, and the next day he launched his own ad calling Shaheen’s commercial a ""smear campaign."" More than ever in this hotly contested Senate race, this seemed like a job for PolitiFact. For support, the ad, and Shaheen’s campaign, pointed to Massachusetts Senate Bill 979, ""An Act Relative to a Woman’s Right to Know,"" filed in 2005. While the bill co-sponsored by Brown and Republican Michael R. Knapik eventually failed, it would have given any woman seeking an abortion information and mandated 24 hours to consider the consequences of that decision. (Exceptions would only be given in the case of a medical emergency.) ""The purpose of the Woman's Right to Know Act is to ensure that every woman considering an abortion receives complete information on the procedure, the risks, the status of her unborn child, and her alternatives, and sufficient reflection time, thereby reducing the possibility of serious, lasting, or life threatening consequences of a medical, emotional and psychological nature,"" the bill states. Similar laws have been proposed and enacted in other states following a 1992 Supreme Court decision allowing the state of Pennsylvania under its ""Abortion Control Act"" to require a woman seeking an abortion to give her informed consent prior to the procedure, receive a host of information about abortion and adoption, and wait 24 hours before having an abortion. The introduction to the Massachusetts bill cites that Supreme Court decision, saying the state ""has an important interest in ensuring that women seeking abortions are provided a fully informed choice and a sufficient period of time to reflect on the information provided, ‘to reduce the risk that a woman may elect an abortion, only to discover later, with devastating psychological consequences, that her decision was not fully informed.’ Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 882 (1992)."" So how about those photographs of fetuses that women would be ""forced"" to look at? Like similar laws proposed and passed elsewhere, the proposed Massachusetts law would have required doctors or their representatives to provide women with lots of information at least 24 hours before an abortion was scheduled, including the names of adoption agencies and contact information for public and private agencies that offer financial and medical support to women throughout a pregnancy and after childbirth. It also required women to receive descriptions of the ""anatomical and physiological characteristics of the unborn child at two week gestational increments from fertilization to full term, including color photographs."" If photos were unavailable ""realistic drawings"" were considered acceptable. The bill made clear that photos of fetuses must be provided to women seeking abortions, but didn’t stop there. It also called for descriptions of the different methods of abortion and ""the physical, psychological and emotional risks or medical complications commonly associated with each method; a description of the physical, psychological and emotional risks or medical complications of pregnancy and delivery; a description of the support obligations of the father of a child born alive."" Before performing an abortion, the doctor or a representative would have to ask the woman if she had ""seen"" the information and ""provide the woman with an opportunity to contact abortion alternative agencies at this time should she so desire."" In addition, a woman’s signature was required before the abortion was performed to give her consent and ""indicate that she has been offered the information described in this section."" Brown says the bill was intended to give adoption a chance and ""did not force women to do anything. I would never force women to do anything."" He’s got a point. Nowhere in the bill is the word ""force"" used. Still, the language of the bill certainly ensures women would be given the information, asks them if they had ""seen it,"" and provided at least 24 hours to review it before having an abortion. Our ruling Shaheen’s ad says that ""in Massachusetts, Scott Brown pushed for a law to force women considering abortion -- force them -- to look at color photographs of developing fetuses."" The measure backed by Brown nine years ago made sure that women were provided photos of developing fetuses, along with a lot more information. It certainly forced doctors and their representatives to provide this information to women seeking abortions -- except in cases of emergency -- and it ensured women received the information both through verbal questions and a signed consent form. Brown has a point that the bill wouldn't have ""forced"" them to look at color photographs -- but it did just about everything else it could possibly do up to that line. This statement is accurate but needs clarification."
Example Output: In Massachusetts, Scott Brown pushed for a law to force women considering abortion -- force them -- to look at color photographs of developing fetuses.

Example Input: One in five people are drinking too much alcohol. 21% of adults aged 16+ in England reported to an NHS Digital survey that they usually drank more than the recommended 14 units of alcohol a week in 2017. Alcohol deaths in England at record high after 6% rise in a year. Correct, in terms of deaths that are a direct result of alcohol misuse. However, the number of alcohol-specific deaths per 100,000 people has remained virtually the same over the last ten years. Claim 1 of 3
Example Output: Alcohol deaths in England at record high after 6% rise in a year.

Example Input: In the United States, one of the most controversial issues surrounding the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic of early 2020 was a debate over whether the Trump administration failed at adequately preparing the country for such an outbreak, and in responding to it in a timely and effective manner once it hit the U.S.: President Donald Trump’s failure to respond to the coronavirus pandemic didn’t begin with the administration’s inability to send out the millions of test kits and the protective medical gear for health care workers that experts say are needed to tackle the crisis. It didn’t start with Trump’s bungled messaging downplaying the crisis even as it’s worsened, nor with his mid-March insistence that social distancing measures could be lifted by Easter (he later backpedaled). It began in April 2018 — more than a year and a half before the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the disease it causes, Covid-19, sickened enough people in China that authorities realized they were dealing with a new disease. The Trump administration, with John Bolton newly at the helm of the White House National Security Council, began dismantling the team in charge of pandemic response, firing its leadership and disbanding the team in spring 2018. The cuts, coupled with the administration’s repeated calls to cut the budget for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other public health agencies, made it clear that the Trump administration wasn’t prioritizing the federal government’s ability to respond to disease outbreaks. That lack of attention to preparedness, experts say, helps explain why the Trump administration has consistently botched its response to the coronavirus pandemic. In response to such criticisms, U.S. President Donald Trump sought to affix blame on other people and entities, including his predecessor in the White House, Barack Obama: For decades the @CDCgov looked at, and studied,  its testing system, but did nothing about it. It would always be inadequate and slow for a large scale pandemic, but a pandemic would never happen, they hoped. President Obama made changes that only complicated things further….. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 13, 2020  Trump’s critics countered his excuses by, among other means, producing a video clip said to date from 2014 (a full five years before the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic) and seemingly showing Obama strongly urging that the U.S. invest in creating an infrastructure for dealing with an “airborne disease that is deadly” that would “allow us to see it quickly, isolate it quickly, respond to it quickly”:   This is indeed a correctly identified video clip which captured Obama’s remarks when he paid a Dec. 2, 2014, visit to campus of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland, to call for more funding for Ebola research: President Barack Obama visited the NIH campus on Dec. 2 to see firsthand the progress that biomedical research is making against Ebola virus disease. The President toured the NIH Vaccine Research Center and met with scientists who are working hard to develop ways to combat this deadly virus that continues to devastate West Africa. And, in a speech before a packed auditorium at the NIH Clinical Center, the President praised the contributions of NIH staff. He also emphasized the need for emergency Congressional authorization of resources to ensure that the nation’s research and public health efforts against Ebola will lead as quickly as possible to an end to this devastating outbreak.
Example Output:
A video clip shows former President Barack Obama stressing the need for U.S. pandemic preparedness in 2014.