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.

Q: On May 12 2020, the following image of small children separated by “chalk squares” on a playground during the COVID-19 pandemic began circulating:In a caption on the above iteration, the user wrote “Their reality …😢🌈,” but did not include any contextual information about the image or the events it showed. In it, five seemingly lonely children were seen in the photograph, each confined to the inside of their own chalk square.One of the five in the upper right corner sat at the edge of her square, her legs outside the boundary. Each chalk square appeared to delineate a solitary play area for every child, and spaces between seemed to ensure the children would not come too close to one another as they engaged in socially distant playground activity.Images of the “chalk square” children circulated concurrently alongside an unrelated viral post by “Americas Mom” on Facebook (archived here), in which a photograph of a crying woman is accompanied by a lengthy rant about the woman’s “quarantine fatigue” and ancillary concerns that her child was becoming lonely and/or irritating her.That post began by outlining the purported social effects of quarantine on children, before devolving into a rant decrying the use of masks and disinfectant:Written by a Mom, thank you 🙏: “I’ve had enough. People need to seriously look around and see what it’s doing to our kids. To kids too young to understand what’s going on. Kids that are by themselves with no siblings to play with, no cousins around, no friends. No secret play dates. No interaction with anyone besides mom or dad. What do you think that’s doing to our kids biologically and psychologically?The answer is we don’t know!But when you’re a parent you can see the hurt that your child is going through every day and you can explain to them why.. Do you know what I’ve been telling her, the truth! People are afraid of getting sick sweetheart. People are dependent on the government to protect them from everything. You might not agree with that and honestly I don’t care. Because I don’t agree with anything that’s going on right now.Every time I get into the car with my child she begs to go someplace, crying. Should I record it for you? Should I make you hear it on the daily like I do? Will that make you change your mind?You say that you care about these kids. You don’t. You fear for these kids, that is a difference. You fear that they’re going to be sick.. but are you fearing that their minds are now going to be ill and stunted in growth with no Social interactions? I hope you know those social interactions are how they build their immune system.So put a new spin on essential employees that are allowed to send their kids to childcare. These kids are allowed the ability to socially interact with one another, and have the ability to build their immune system. Nonessential employees or people that never put their child in daycare and relied on social interaction for play are now being stunted. So you’re telling us our kids are no longer essential? Our kids aren’t essential￼ enough to build their immune system’s or build their social connections?You say you are not wanting to open the playgrounds because you can’t socially distance and you can’t disinfect. Where was your concern with disinfecting prior to coronavirus? Are you telling us that you never sanitized the parks before so they were riddled with viruses and bacteria that our child was going to become ill?Open the playgrounds, stop the social distancing, stop the masks that are POINTLESS. And I swear to god if the medical professional comes on here and says I wear a mask for 12 hours a day, I’m gonna put your ass on blast. Because you do not wear a mask all throughout your 12 hour shift. Stop lying to yourself.If you don’t agree with me that’s fine. But step the f**k out of my way while I try to fix the future for my child. Because I’ll be damned if she cries every day wanting to play with somebody or wanting to go do something and she can’t because you live in fear. Live in fear in your own f**king house.”As for the children playing in chalk squares, that image was originally tweeted by French journalist Lionel Top on May 12 2020:Les enfants font leur rentrée aujourd’hui (un petite partie d’entre-eux plutôt). Ambiance très étrange, voire dérangeante… pic.twitter.com/g91y5hLatJ— Lionel Top (@lioneltop) May 12, 2020That tweet, automatically translated by Twitter, read:The children are coming back today (a small part of them rather). Very strange, even disturbing atmosphere …In a second tweet, Top provided additional detail about the photograph:Contexte :Pour faire respecter les distances, tout en profitant des récrés, l’équipe pédagogique a dessiné des carrés au sol pour les + petits. Les enfants jouent, dansent, sautent, rient ensemble… mais depuis ce carré.De ce qu’on a vu, ils ne le vivent pas comme une punition https://t.co/i98ZltvteN— Lionel Top (@lioneltop) May 12, 2020Ils apprennent à vivre ensemble mais différemment.Les photos sont marquantes et la plupart des réactions sur Twitter témoignent d’une même émotion, celle d’une école qui ne correspond pas à ce que l’on connaît, mais les enfants ce matin n’étaient pas « malheureux »— Lionel Top (@lioneltop) May 12, 2020Twitter translation:Context: To ensure that distances are respected, while taking advantage of recreation, the teaching team has drawn squares on the ground for the little ones. The children play, dance, jump, laugh together … but from this square. From what we’ve seen, they don’t see it as a punishmentThey learn to live together but differently. The photos are striking and most of the reactions on Twitter show the same emotion, that of a school which does not correspond to what we know, but the children this morning were not “unhappy”A viral photograph of children in “chalk squares” after returning to school during the COVID-19 pandemic was real, shared by a French journalist on May 12 2020. Top captured the image at a preschool in Tourcoing, France, and emphasized that the children were not suffering or unhappy.Comments

A: A photograph appears to show small schoolchildren playing alone in marked-off chalk squares drawn on playground asphalt.
****
Q: The Idaho State Journal reports that last year there were nearly 6,600 STD cases, including HIV, up from fewer than 6,300 in 2016. Cases are also up nationally, with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announcing last week that nearly 2.3 million cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis were diagnosed in the United States in 2017. Kimberly Matulonis-Edgar of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare says experts in the state and across the country are struggling to understand what’s driving the increase. The most prevalent STDs reported nationally and in Idaho are gonorrhea and chlamydia. State health officials say that the rate of reported gonorrhea cases in Southeast Idaho fell about 14 percent from a year ago, but jumped more than 200 percent in south-central Idaho. ___ Information from: Idaho State Journal, http://www.journalnet.com

A: Health experts alarmed by jump in STDs in Idaho.
****
Q: "What happened to Minnesota nice? Michele Bachmann blasted her fellow Minnesotan Tim Pawlenty after he questioned her experience. The two are competing for the Republican nomination for president. ""These are serious times that require serious solutions -- not more of the same. Being right on the issues is critical -- it is what the American people demand. Executive experience is not an asset if it simply means bigger and more intrusive government,"" Bachmann said in a prepared statement on July 24, 2011. ""Governor Pawlenty said in 2006, 'The era of small government is over... the government has to be more proactive and more aggressive.' That's the same philosophy that, under President Obama, has brought us record deficits, massive unemployment and an unconstitutional health care plan."" We wanted to see if Bachmann was correct about what Pawlenty said about small government, as it seems like a sentiment unlikely to be popular in a Republican primary. We contacted both campaigns for comment but didn't hear back from either one. We were able to easily find the comment; it originated with an August 2006 report in the Minneapolis Star Tribune. (We found it in the Nexis newspaper database.) ""Pawlenty sees his role as reformer,"" says the headline. ""The GOP governor has targeted what he calls excessive corporate power. Critics call his election-year 'populism' cosmetic."" The story says that starting in 2006, Pawlenty ""repeatedly made himself a nuisance to major industries that frequently back Republicans,"" particularly calling on Congress to put new regulations on prescription drug companies and auto makers. The story said he called for a two-year ban on advertising prescription drugs, urged regulators to speed the release of generic insulin products and proposed new regulations to support the use of ethanol. ""Those kinds of proposals for government intervention in the free market on the surface might seem unusual coming from a conservative GOP politician. But they are illustrations of the way that Pawlenty, a fiscal and social conservative, also styles himself a kind of latter-day trust buster, a reformer who is unafraid to challenge big business and wield government power to correct imbalances in the marketplace,"" the story said. And here's the key section:  ""The era of small government is over,"" Pawlenty said in an interview with the Star Tribune. ""I'm a market person, but there are certain circumstances where you've got to have government put up the guardrails or bust up entrenched interests before they become too powerful ... Government has to be more proactive, more aggressive."" ...  Pawlenty insists his own populist streak is no election-year attempt to steer toward the middle. Peel back the conservative, he said, and you find the boy who grew up near South St. Paul's stockyards and learned what happened when power became too concentrated. When companies gain too much power, he said, they can suppress wages. Drug companies can command high prices for brand-name products long after they could have gone generic. Oil companies can use their muscle to keep out renewable fuels. HMOs can shift costs from their members to the public at large. While he may not fit the DFL [Democratic-Farm-Labor Party] definition of a populist, Pawlenty said, ""it's a matter of where you draw the line. ... I know that concentrated power unchecked leads to bad things,"" he said. We're not sure what Pawlenty's own reaction to the story was, but his press secretary didn't like it. The next day, the Star Tribune ran a ""clarification,"" that said the story ""quoted Gov. Tim Pawlenty saying 'The era of small government is over,' a comment he made in reference to a point made in a 2004 column by New York Times columnist David Brooks. Pawlenty spokesman Brian McClung said Monday that Pawlenty's record shows he is not a supporter of 'big government' and that he was 'simply talking about the need for government to be more effective and active.'"" The Star Tribune story doesn't mention David Brooks, but we went searching for the relevant story, and it seems likely it was a story Brooks wrote for the New York Times Magazine that took the measure of the conservative movement in 2004, headlined ""How to re-invent the G.O.P."" In the story, Brooks noted that historical forces like Islamic extremism and the end of socialism were changing the nature of conservatism, pushing it away from a minimalist vision for government. The new conservatism ""understands the paradox that if you don't have a positive vision of government, you won't be able to limit the growth of government. If you can't offer people a vision of what government should do, you won't be able to persuade them about the things it shouldn't do. If the Republican Party is going to evolve into a principled majority party, members of this group are going to have to build a governing philosophy based on this insight,"" Brooks wrote. Brooks said George W. Bush typified this new approach. ""By the time he began his campaign for president in 1999, Bush understood that the simple government-is-the-problem philosophy of the older Republicans was obsolete. During that campaign, Bush criticized what he called the 'destructive mind-set: the idea that if government would only get out of our way, all our problems would be solved. An approach with no higher goal, no nobler purpose, than ""Leave us alone.''' Instead, Bush argued, 'government must be carefully limited but strong and active.'"" Pawlenty maintains that he was incorrectly quoted in the Star Tribune story. In May 2011, he went on Rush Limbaugh's radio show, and Limbaugh asked him if he had indeed said, ""The era of small government is over."" ""The other side has pushed that falsely for a number of years,"" Pawleny said, according to the show's transcript. ""What happened is in the Minnesota Star Tribune -- not exactly a conservative publication -- I made reference to an article that David Brooks wrote which was entitled, 'The Era of Small Government is Over.' I didn't say those words myself; I was referencing his article. ""The very next day, the Star Tribune, after a big battle, printed a clarification or a correction in their correction page,"" he continued. ""Of course, the main article was on page one and the correction was buried in some footnote in page three, but that incorrect quote has haunted me -- and I'm glad I had a chance in this big national forum on your great show to clarify, because if you go to the next day's newspaper you'll see the clarification in the Star Tribune."" We should note that the headline of the Brooks' article we found was not ""The Era of Small Government is Over,"" but we won't quibble about that. Pawlenty could have seen the article or another one like it somewhere with a modified headline, and the phrase certainly captures the article's sentiment. We also contacted the Star Tribune to see if it still stood by the story. The story's author, Patricia Lopez, is now the newspaper's political editor. Here's what she said: ""The governor was quoted correctly, which is why we printed only a clarification. He was quoting a David Brooks column, but as you can see, it was in support of other statements he made about the role of government. He never asked to have any other statement in the article corrected."" But even if Pawlenty was quoting Brooks when he said the phrase ""the era of small government is over"" during the interview, he seemed to be doing so approvingly. The rest of the article portrays Pawlenty as someone who was willing to use government to intervene in the markets and gives examples to support that. Here's a little more from the story. ""Oil companies have played a role in suppressing the development of alternative fuels,"" Pawlenty said, with heavy-handed contracts that prevent gasoline stations from providing pumps for renewable fuels such as ethanol. With the nation's economic security at stake, ""that is disproportionate power,"" he said. ""Government has to step in."" Similarly, when he testified before Congress for reimportation of drugs from Canada, where prices are government-regulated, Pawlenty said he got a taste of the pharmaceutical industry's might. ""I've seen it firsthand,"" he said. ""They've got a power that would frighten most citizens."" Pawlenty has changed positions on energy policy; he once supported a cap and trade system but no longer does. We looked for any recent statements he's made about reimporting drugs from Canada, but couldn't find any. We also asked two political watchers in Minnesota if the Star Tribune story was generally reflective of Pawlenty's political views in 2006. They said it was. ""In terms of his views on government, I think he can best be described as actively wanting to use the government to achieve certain ends, only with less taxes,"" said David Schultz, a professor at Hamline University who studies Minnesota politics. Schultz said Pawlenty's rhetoric became more conservative starting around 2008, when his name was mentioned as a potential running mate for John McCain. ""In fairness, Pawlenty did restrain spending by the Democratic Legislature. But he was more moderate on several other issues than he now appears, and the (Star Tribune story) is an example of that,"" said Steve Schier, a professor of political science at Carleton College. So where does this leave us? Back in 2006, Pawlenty was portraying himself as a conservative who was willing to intervene in markets, and he said that government has to ""bust up entrenched interests before they become too powerful."" It appears he's been backing off those positions in 2011, but that doesn't change what his views were years ago. If he was quoting David Brooks when he said ""the era of small government is over,"" he seemed to be doing so approvingly, though a spokesman said he did not mean to imply that he supported ""big government.""."

A:
"Michele Bachmann Says Tim Pawlenty said in 2006, ""The era of small government is over... the government has to be more proactive and more aggressive."
****