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.

[Q]: Paragraph: After nearly disappearing in the United States, the bloodsucking pests have made a comeback in recent years, quickly infesting apartment buildings and stubbornly resisting common insecticides. The city of New York alone spends as much as $40 million a year in bedbug control. A study of bedbug genetics presented on Tuesday at the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene meeting in Philadelphia now suggests why. A team of entomologists led by Coby Schal and Ed Vargo of North Carolina State University studied the genes of bedbugs infesting three multistory apartment buildings in North Carolina and New Jersey and found very low genetic diversity — meaning most of them were very close relatives. They were so close in fact that the team suspects it may have taken just one or two founder insects to start an entire infestation. “We find that bedbug infestations basically start from a very small number of individuals,” Schal said in a telephone interview. “A single mated female bedbug starts the infestation. She gives rise to offspring and those offspring mate with each other and with their mother,” he said. “This is different from many animals,” he said, mostly because close inbreeding can result in genetic deformities, adding, “In humans, it is taboo.”   But he said there are some animals that can withstand such close inbreeding without experiencing detrimental effects including cockroaches. Schal said this may be a trait of insects that have evolved an association with humans and rely on them to get from place to place. Typically this happens when humans bring infested furniture into their homes, and he warns people to inspect second-hand furniture carefully. “There is a myth out there that bedbugs get transported on people,” Schal said. Unlike ticks, the wingless, reddish-brown insects stay attached to people for a blood meal for just 5 to 10 minutes, he said. “The chances that a person is carrying bedbugs on them is quite low.”   According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, bedbugs do not carry disease, but their bites can cause severe itching and a whole lot of anxiety. Schal said his findings are not likely to lead to new insecticides for bedbugs, but they do underscore the need to move fast once bedbugs are detected. “If you don’t deal with them early they can spread thorough   a building very quickly,” he said. Claim: All in the family: Inbreeding key to bedbug spread.
[A]: Inbreeding may be the secret to the bedbug’s success, U.S. researchers said on Tuesday.


[Q]: Paragraph: "As part of his campaign to become Missouri’s 56th governor, Chris Koster tweeted a statistic about something he has been working to accomplish during his time as attorney general: closing the tobacco loophole. In his tweet, Koster called upon the legislature to #FixTheLoophole, which he says will save Missourians $50 million. The so-called tobacco loophole is money the state hopes to get from five big tobacco companies if it takes a tougher line with smaller ones. We looked into whether $50 million is really on the line. Tobacco background We reached out to the Koster campaign to find out what closing the loophole entailed. We heard back from David Turner, a spokesman for the Missouri Democratic Party. Turner told us that the tobacco loophole arose in 1998 as part of a master settlement agreement between the attorneys general of 46 states, along with Washington, D.C., and five U.S. territories, and the five largest tobacco companies in the U.S. The states had sued the tobacco companies for selling cigarettes which they knew caused cancer, emphysema and other diseases. The attorneys general wanted to recover the cost of caring for those people. The settlement said that in exchange for dropping the lawsuits, the states would receive roughly $10 billion dollars a year, essentially indefinitely. The annual payment to Missouri is about $130 million. As part of the deal, Missouri passed a law that required all nonparticipating tobacco companies to pay into an escrow fund. This was done in part to ensure that small cigarette makers didn’t gain a market advantage because they would be able to sell cigarettes at reduced prices. But there was a catch. If a state failed to ""diligently enforce"" the requirement that small companies make escrow payments, and the big tobacco companies lost a set amount of market share as a result, that state would lose a portion of its tobacco settlement money. According to a state auditor, that’s exactly what happened. The big tobacco companies lost an 8 percent market share from 1997 to 2003. As a result, the companies sued Missouri and other states for violating the settlement. In 2013, an arbitration panel found that in Missouri, of the 432 million cigarettes sold by nonparticipating manufacturers in 2002, companies made escrow payments on only $102 million. The panel ruled against Missouri and five other states, meaning the Show-Me State had to pay back $70 million from its 2014 payment. In February, Koster negotiated an agreement with the tobacco companies to return $50 million to Missouri — on the condition the state tighten the rules on the smaller cigarette makers. Which brings us to the loophole. Under current Missouri law, the smaller companies can trim the amount they pay into the escrow fund. Missouri is the only state that has yet to take steps to prevent this. The loophole The way escrow payments are calculated, small tobacco companies can get most of the money they pay back if they restrict their sales to only a few states. In order to close the loophole — and return $50 million to Missouri — the legislature would have to pass Senate Bill 1096. The bill would require all nonparticipating manufacturers to either join the master settlement or be subject to modified escrow rules which prevent the companies from gaming the system to keep their escrow money. SB 1096 has supporters on both sides of the aisle, but it is not without its opponents. Small tobacco companies have been fighting different versions of the bill for more than a decade, calling it a tax on their products and a move on the part of big tobacco to earn more market share at their expense. SB 1096 has yet to pass either chamber of the General Assembly, and the consequences are already being felt. Because the bill failed to pass before April 15, Missouri can no longer receive the $50 million for 2016. In order to receive the money in 2017, the bill must be signed by Gov. Jay Nixon by June 3. Taxpayer impact The loophole is the source of Koster’s $50 million figure, but will recouping the loss actually save taxpayers money? It certainly has cost the state. In October, Nixon withheld $46.1 million of the state's budget, relying on the passage of SB 1096 to fill the gap. Turner said that money would have gone to the Mental Health Department and the Department of Social Services, among others. For these programs to be maintained at their initial levels, Turner explained, taxpayers would be forced to cover the money lost in the tobacco arbitration. Gaining the $50 million dollars would allow those programs to remain uncut without costing the taxpayers any additional money. All things being equal, if the bill passes, taxpayers would win no matter what the state does with the money. If it’s spent on services, citizens get the benefit of $50 million worth of services. If the state cuts spending and lowers taxes, they save money when they file their taxes in April. And that’s just in 2017. If the loophole isn’t closed, Missouri could lose additional money in the years to come. The big tobacco companies have begun arbitration concerning Missouri’s diligent enforcement of the escrow laws in 2004. If an arbitration panel were to find against Missouri again, the state could be forced to forfeit more money. If SB 1096 passes, the companies would not seek arbitration for any of the years 2004 to 2014, per Koster’s agreement. Our ruling Koster said that closing the tobacco loophole would save Missouri taxpayers $50 million. The tobacco settlement and the arbitration that followed is complicated, but ultimately, Koster did reach a settlement to return $50 million dollars to Missouri. If the legislature passes SB 1096 by June 3, that money would come to the state in 2017. If it doesn’t, the state could potentially be on the hook for even more. Any money the state received would be dollars that taxpayers would not have to provide. Taxpayers could get $50 million worth of services or $50 million in tax cuts. Either way, they come out ahead." Claim: Closing the tobacco loophole would save Missouri taxpayers $50,000,000
[A]: Our ruling Koster said that closing the tobacco loophole would save Missouri taxpayers $50 million. Koster said that closing the tobacco loophole would save Missouri taxpayers $50 million. The tobacco settlement and the arbitration that followed is complicated, but ultimately, Koster did reach a settlement to return $50 million dollars to Missouri. If the legislature passes SB 1096 by June 3, that money would come to the state in 2017. If it doesn’t, the state could potentially be on the hook for even more. The tobacco settlement and the arbitration that followed is complicated, but ultimately, Koster did reach a settlement to return $50 million dollars to Missouri. If the legislature passes SB 1096 by June 3, that money would come to the state in 2017. If it doesn’t, the state could potentially be on the hook for even more. Any money the state received would be dollars that taxpayers would not have to provide. Taxpayers could get $50 million worth of services or $50 million in tax cuts. Either way, they come out ahead. Any money the state received would be dollars that taxpayers would not have to provide. Taxpayers could get $50 million worth of services or $50 million in tax cuts. Either way, they come out ahead.rue.rue.


[Q]: Paragraph: The newfound Republican support comes for an idea that Democrats have tried in vain for years to get passed in the GOP-controlled Legislature. Democratic Gov. Tony Evers proposed legalizing medical marijuana earlier this year, but Republicans rejected it. Similar Democratic proposals, as well as efforts to legalize recreational pot and  decriminalize possession, have gone nowhere. But times are changing, said Republican Rep. Mary Felzkowski, co-sponsor of the latest bill. “People are asking for medical marijuana,” said Felzkowski, a cancer survivor. She conceded that the bill won’t pass this session, due largely to opposition in the Republican-controlled Senate. But just getting a public hearing for the first time “would be a huge win,” she said. And then, maybe next session, support will grow to the point it could pass, she said. There’s no doubt public support is strong. In 2018, 16 counties and two Wisconsin cities, representing 52% of the state’s population, approved non-binding referendums in support of legalizing either medical or recreational marijuana. A Marquette University Law School poll in April showed 83% of respondents supported legalizing medical marijuana and 59% backed full legalization. “Each one of us knows someone that has suffered through an illness,” Felzkowski said. “Medical marijuana is just another tool in the toolbox to help our suffering loved ones make it through the day with some semblance of normalcy.” Felzkowski said when she was battling breast cancer in 2014 that she “lived on opioids.” Had marijuana been an option, “oh god yes” she would have taken it, Felzkowski said. “There’s being conservative but there’s being libertarian too,” Felzkowski said. “Having been through what I’ve gone through, I don’t think the government should tell me what I could take.” Senate Republicans have proven to be the biggest roadblock to the idea in Wisconsin. Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, who is running for Congress, said in September that legalizing medical marijuana won’t pass the Senate because “everyone knows that medical marijuana leads to legalized marijuana.” He reiterated his opposition Wednesday, saying he personally opposes the bill and doesn’t think it has the votes to pass the Senate. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, who has been generally supportive of medical marijuana, said it was “clear” there wasn’t consensus among Assembly Republicans. “The governor wants to see more bipartisan work and hopes there will at least be a public hearing on the issue of medical marijuana,” said Evers spokeswoman Melissa Baldauff. Introduction of a bill by Republicans signals a further weakening of traditional GOP opposition to the idea in Wisconsin. Neighboring Michigan, Minnesota and Illinois are among the 33 states that have legalized marijuana for medical purposes and 11 states, including Michigan and Illinois, have legalized it for recreational purposes. Felzkowski said she remained “very open” to making changes to the measure, which she said was based on input from fellow, more skeptical Republicans and best practices from other states. The latest bill would allow doctors to prescribe certain forms of marijuana under limited circumstances. Marijuana that is smoked and edibles could not be prescribed. It would be permitted in the form of liquid, oil, pill, in a highly concentrated form known as tincture or as a topical application. Patients would need a prescription and they would obtain the marijuana from a licensed dispensary. Only patients with certain conditions would qualify. The qualifying conditions as proposed are cancer, HIV/AIDS, glaucoma, ALS, Crohn’s disease, multiple sclerosis, seizure disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder. A commission created to regulate the program could add additional conditions. In October, three dozen Democrats and just four Republicans introduced a bill to legalize medical marijuana with far fewer limitations. While Evers supported it, the bill has gone nowhere in the Legislature. Felzkowski said that measure was doomed because it was “wide open.” She was hopeful that changing attitudes would lead to a more limited medical marijuana proposal like hers becoming law. “Don’t let excellent get in the way of good,” Felzkowski said. ___ Follow Scott Bauer on Twitter: https://twitter.com/sbauerAP Claim: GOP support grows for legal medical marijuana in Wisconsin.
[A]:
The push to legalize medical marijuana in Wisconsin gained momentum Wednesday with the unveiling of a bill introduced for the first time by Republican lawmakers.