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: "In stark, black-and-white montages of tear-streaked female faces, District 27 state senate hopeful Kevin Rader blasts his Republican opponent in a campaign ad for her anti-abortion views. Rader, a Democrat and state House member, accuses Republican Lizbeth Benacquisto of strongly opposing abortion and having ties to extremist conservative groups that would criminally prosecute rape victims for having abortions. ""Lizbeth Benacquisto strongly opposes a woman's right of choice,"" the ad states. ""The extremist groups who support her would make these women into criminals. She supported an extreme law to require pregnant women to pay for  and view a sonogram before they could exercise their right of choice. Her allies would make choice illegal in all cases, including rape, incest, even to save a woman's life. Vote no on Benacquisto, keep extremism out of our state Senate."" The ad enraged Benacquisto, a city councilwoman in Wellington, who responded with her own ad and the revelation that she was raped 23 years ago as a University of Florida freshman. She underscored her support for an exception to abortion for rape victims, saying she would ""never stand down when any woman has been abused,"" and demanded Rader pull the ad. Rader's camp said the only way that will happen is if Benacquisto renounces the support given to her by far-right, conservative right-to-life groups. With such a high emotion level in this campaign, we thought Rader's claim about Benacquisto's supporters was worth a look. Benacquisto is pro-life, and she makes no secret of it on her website and in questionnaires. Same with her support of the ultrasound legislation, though she has noted in various interviews she has concerns about its impact on rape victims. In a candidate questionnaire from the Christian Coalition of Florida, she added, ""I consistently support this because I am pro-life."" Benacquisto holds support from a handful of conservative, anti-abortion groups. Among those are the Christian Coalition, the Florida Right to Life PAC and the Christian Family Coalition. Though they haven't donated financially, both Florida Right to Life and the former Christian Coalition executive director have offered endorsements, and she headlined at least one event, a breakfast for the Christian Family Coalition on Oct. 16. Florida Right to Life believes life begins at conception and ends at natural death, and all points in between are to be defended. It labels abortion ""infanticide,"" which is a crime. And the Christian Coalition of Florida states, ""Although legal in the United States, we believe abortion is no less than murder of an innocent human life."" Using this logic, abortion equals murder and murder is a crime. Therefore, those who have abortions would be criminals. The Christian Family Coalition, based in Miami, says it ""works to introduce pro-family legislation at the state and local levels of government. It informs and educates citizens on where candidates stand on the issues that affect the traditional family unit."" The group’s website includes a link to ""abortion,"" but contains just news articles and press releases in which it is mentioned. Each of those three organizations also closely follows abortion-related legislation. They post opinions on everything from parental notice to making the violent death of any fetus -- viable or otherwise -- cause for a first-degree murder charge. But none appear to flat-out say they would support abortion regardless of whether a woman was raped, abused by a family member or faced with death. They skirt the issue. For example, Florida Right to Life says, ""We promote, uphold and support reverence and respect for human life without regard to condition, quality, age, race, religion, color or whether born or unborn."" On the National Right to Life page, the only reference to exceptions is a 2005 survey indicating only 0.5 percent of women have abortions due to rape, while 4 percent undergo it for the mother's health. Rader's campaign manager, Michael McCall, said, ""The problem with something like that is if you take an organization like Florida Right to Life, their very core is making abortion illegal. They won't list every case in which they support banning abortions, because they support banning abortions in all cases."" It's clear that groups supporting Benacquisto have firm stands against abortion, but they're not spelled out precisely. What is clear, though, is that the groups don't offer up any exceptions. So we don't expect Rader's campaign to find any." Claim: "Lizbeth Benacquisto's supporters ""would make (abortion) illegal in all cases, including rape, incest, even to save a woman's life."

A: "Kevin Rader says ""extremist"" supporters of his opponent would make abortion illegal in all cases"
****
Q: Paragraph: The lawsuit seeking class-action status was filed in U.S. District Court on behalf of a dozen children against Gov. Jim Justice, the state Department of Health and Human Resources and other state officials. The 105-page complaint describes stories of neglect and harm done to foster children while under the department’s care. Many were in inadequate and dangerous placements, left without necessary services or forced to languish in foster care for years, including a 17-year-old suicidal boy who sleeps in a locked cell at a juvenile detention center. Filed by a Charleston law firm and nonprofit advocacy groups A Better Childhood and Disability Rights West Virginia, the lawsuit said the state’s child welfare system has “significant administrative problems that hinder its ability to operate effectively.” “For years, the state has ignored repeated recommendations about how to fix the damaging West Virginia foster care system,” Marcia Robinson Lowry, executive director of A Better Childhood, said in a statement. “Children are being sent to institutions, placed in foster homes without any services, and abandoned by the state.” New York-based A Better Childhood has filed similar lawsuits in several states. DHHR Secretary Bill Crouch said changes were made to the child welfare system starting in 2013 and efforts have increased every year since. Crouch said the lawsuit will cost the state millions of dollars “and was filed by a company that has never contacted us to ask the question: ‘What are you doing to fix these problems?’ We welcome the opportunity to make our case in court.” The governor’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Earlier this year, West Virginia agreed to expand mental health services for children after a federal investigation found the state unnecessarily institutionalized kids with emotional or behavioral disorders. In the case of the 17-year-old boy, the lawsuit said he was physically abused by his family and has been under DHHR care since 2012. He lived in group homes and residential care centers before being sent to a juvenile detention center, where he sleeps on a mattress on a cement floor in a locked cell. He suffers from depression, has attempted suicide several times and will be homeless when he ages out of the system within the year, the lawsuit said. In September, the DHHR told lawmakers that 651 foster care children, mostly teen boys, have run away from group care settings or schools in less than a year. “Not only are we failing to provide federally mandated care, but we are also failing to prepare these children for what lies ahead and instead condemning many of them to a life of abuse and homelessness once they age out of foster care,” plaintiffs’ attorney Richard Walters said. The DHHR’s foster care ranks have swelled to about 6,900 children — an increase of more than 60% from the same time in 2015 — as the state grapples with the opioid addiction epidemic. West Virginia has by far the highest rate of drug overdose deaths in the nation. The lawsuit said three siblings ages 2, 3 and 4 were placed under DHHR care because of drug-addicted parents, but the children have moved from one foster home to another “due to DHHR’s inability to appropriately develop case plans and to follow department procedures.” West Virginia can no longer use the opioid epidemic as an excuse, the lawsuit said. “The foster care crisis in West Virginia is not an issue that just arose in the last 4-5 years, it’s a systemic problem that has festered in the state for almost 20 years,” said Jeremiah Underhill, legal director of Disability Rights West Virginia. The lawsuit also says the state failed to maintain an adequate number of appropriate foster homes and resorts to quick placements among relatives without vetting or monitoring to ensure children’s safety. The reliance upon kinship caregivers has increased more than 30 percentage points over the past five years. State lawmakers have limited placement of a child in an out-of-state facility unless it’s closer to the child’s family or the child has a health issue that cannot be addressed by an in-state facility. Claim: Federal lawsuit targets West Virginia foster care system.

A: The overwhelmed foster care system in opioid-ravaged West Virginia has failed to protect children, according to a federal lawsuit filed Monday.
****
Q: Paragraph: "The mass shooting in Las Vegas prompted former Democratic Congressman Steve Israel of New York to write that these horrific events have little impact on public policy. In a New York Times op-ed, Israel walked through a list of shootings -- the murder of 26 children and adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., in 2012, the June 2016 mass shooting in an Orlando nightclub, and others -- and noted that despite the hand-wringing after each one, nothing changed. Israel said Democrats were unable to enact reforms, including ""our attempts to rescind the infamous Dickey Amendment, which prevents the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from even researching the relationship between gun violence and public health."" ""The result?"" Israel wrote Oct. 2. ""The government can’t study gun violence but is spending $400,000 analyzing the effects of Swedish massages on rabbits."" There are two elements to sift through here: Does the Dickey Amendment block government research into gun violence and public health? And is Washington studying Swedish massage on rabbits? In 1996, with strong support from the National Rifle Association, Congress included an amendment by Rep. Jay Dickey, R-Ark., in its omnibus spending bill. The amendment said ""none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control."" In the same bill, Congress pulled $2.8 million aimed at gun injury research and assigned it elsewhere in the CDC. Ever since, Washington and the CDC have steered clear of funding research that could run afoul of that amendment. Israel said the provision prevents government-funded studies of the ties between guns and public health, but plenty of people say the rule is not binding. Dickey himself joined with the former head of the CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Mark Rosenberg to challenge that long-held assumption. ""We believe strongly that funding for research into gun-violence prevention should be dramatically increased,"" they wrote in a 2016 public letter. ""We do not see the congressional language against using federal funds ‘to promote or advocate gun control’ as a barrier to this research."" An article on the Harvard Law Petrie-Flom Center blog argued that the amendment bars research aimed at promoting gun control and not all research. U.S. Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., echoed that point in a letter to the CDC, saying the meaning had been ""misconstrued."" But that belief had its own consequences. ""As a result, public health researchers at the CDC and other federal agencies have been discouraged from conducting scientific research on gun violence,"" Carper wrote March 17, 2016. ""Although the CDC self-directs a portion of its nearly $6.2 billion annual budget to a wide variety of intra- and extramural research, the CDC has been reluctant to devote funding to gun violence research without a specific appropriation from Congress."" Carper offered proof that the Dickey Amendment can co-exist with government gun violence studies. He noted that in 2015, the CDC assessed the causes of a rise in gun violence in Wilmington, Del. In general, the impact of the Dickey Amendment is more political than legal. Research could move forward, but without an explicit signoff from Congress, there’s been limited activity. After the 2012 Newtown slayings, President Barack Obama directed the CDC to conduct or fund research into the causes of gun violence. The impact was modest. ""As far as I can tell the CDC still correctly believes that gun research, or even mentioning guns, is too hot to handle,"" said director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center David Hemenway. Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research director Daniel Webster also said there’s been no new funding from CDC or the National Institutes of Health. Rosenberg told us, ""The research scientists at CDC are very anxious to do this research, but the recent directors of CDC have been willing to let this eminently solvable problem fester because they fear that the NRA will prod Congress into cutting public health programs that are viewed as more central and critical to CDC's mission."" As for the $400,000 spent on studying the effects of Swedish massages on rabbits that Israel mentioned, yes, the government did that. (The exact amount was closer to $387,000.) It gave the Ohio State University Sports Medicine Center money to build a small device that mimics the action of Swedish massage to see if the treatment reduced pain and inflammation. Rabbits were the test subjects. The treatment helped, by the way. Researchers found that with the right mix of force, duration and frequency, there was ""maximal recovery of muscle and joint function."" However, there’s an issue of timing with Israel’s statement. He said the government is currently spending money on this research. In fact, the study ended in 2014. Israel spokesman Harrison Feuer didn’t argue that detail. ""The larger point that Congressman Israel was looking to accurately make is that the government has funded studies into various endeavors that are less impactful than guns on public health,"" Feuer said. Israel said the Dickey Amendment prevents the CDC from researching the relationship between gun violence and public health. As a matter of law, it only prevents money going toward research aimed at promoting gun control. But as a matter of politics, that distinction is murky, and as a result, research has been limited. Israel’s point about Swedish massage on rabbits is off on the timing, but right on the substance. Israel’s statement has some technical flaws, but the broader thrust is accurate." Claim: "Steve Israel Says the Dickey Amendment ""prevents the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from even researching the relationship between gun violence and public health. ... The government can’t study gun violence but is spending $400,000 analyzing the effects of Swedish massages on rabbits."

A:
Israel said the Dickey Amendment prevents the CDC from researching the relationship between gun violence and public health. As a matter of law, it only prevents money going toward research aimed at promoting gun control. But as a matter of politics, that distinction is murky, and as a result, research has been limited. Israel’s point about Swedish massage on rabbits is off on the timing, but right on the substance. Israel’s statement has some technical flaws, but the broader thrust is accurate.
****