Given a paragraph and a claim, classify it this way: If the claim contradicts the evidence present in the paragraph, classify the claim as '0'. If the claim has multiple supporting *AND* contradicting evidences, classify the claim as '1'. If the claim has supporting evidence and the paragraph is in overall favor of the claim, then classify the claim as '2'.

Q: Paragraph: Miami U.S. District Judge Federico Moreno rejected a motion by the South Florida Water Management District to end a decree signed in 1992. Among other things, the order sets thresholds for the amount of phosphorous in the Everglades, an ingredient in fertilizer from the vast sugar-growing regions to the north that promotes unhealthy plant growth in the sprawling marsh. Moreno said among his reasons for denying the water district’s motion is that its governing board is being largely replaced by new Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has made the environment a top priority. The judge also said it would require a full evidentiary hearing on complicated scientific and environmental issues to end the decree. “This is the right thing to do at this time,” Moreno said at a hearing. “There’s really no harm, is there?” The order allows the water district to file the motion again in the future. The decree is not involved with other water problems that plagued Florida coasts last year, including red tide outbreaks and algae blooms. The water district and sugar growers say the decree is outdated, thwarts projects that would benefit the Everglades and has been superseded by subsequent state and federal laws that guarantee restoration would continue. The projects include vast reservoirs that cleanse water flowing south from sugar farms before it flows into the Everglades. “Twenty-seven years is enough. It’s enough because it’s unnecessary,” said water board attorney Brian Accardo. The U.S. government, environmental groups and the Miccosukee Indian tribe disagree, saying the decree is key to pursuing potential violations and ensuring the cleanup projects get built. They say it should remain in place until the Everglades has achieved an environmental balance close to its historical makeup. The Miccosukee reservation is in the Everglades. “The decree is essential to protect the Everglades,” said Anna Upton, attorney for the Florida Audubon Society. “We’re not there yet. We’ve come a long way.” The decree arose out of a 1988 lawsuit filed by the U.S. against the water district claiming high phosphorous discharges were threatening the long-term future of the Everglades. The state and water district contended the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was equally responsible by moving polluted water into the area. In 1992, the consent decree was signed involving the federal and state entities, setting goals for reducing phosphorous as well as the levels of water at the right times needed to keep the ecosystem healthy. A key point in the settlement talks came with then-Gov. Lawton Chiles, a Democrat, showed up at a court hearing in 1991 and said: “We want to surrender. I want to find out who I can give my sword to.” Florida Department of Environmental Protection attorney Charles DeMonaco said about $2 billion has been spent to date on Everglades projects, with another $1 billion in the pipeline over the next four years. He said the state would also like to see the consent decree end, but only when there is an agreement on how success would be measured. “We don’t want to fight anyone. We want to end it,” DeMonaco said. _____ Follow Curt Anderson on Twitter: http://twitter.com/Miamicurt Claim: Judge won’t end decades-old Everglades cleanup oversight.

A: 2
****
Q: Paragraph: "A startling Obamacare claim swept from blog to blog last week: ""SHOCKING: Obamacare Provision Will Allow ‘Forced’ Home Inspections."" One blogger used a photo of armed officers entering a cottage, with the overline, ""We’re from the government and we’re here to raid your home."" Another said ""this is why the IRS has been training with AR-15s."" A reader sent us a post from BenSwann.com, ""Obamacare provision: ‘Forced’ home inspections."" He wondered if it were true. So did we. South Carolina’s concern ""Forced home inspections""? Um, no. The flurry originated with BenSwann.com blogger Joshua Cook on Aug. 13. He picked up the phrase ""forced home inspections"" from a state lawmaker in South Carolina. Back in March, as a group of state legislators discussed a bill to fight the Affordable Care Act, Rep. Rick Quinn offered a specific example of something in the law that worried him: ""The forced home inspections that I’ve heard about."" Cook was there. And the comment nagged him. He noticed people weren’t really writing about the issue. ""It's just been bothering me,"" he told PolitiFact. So he wrote about it last week, talking with an attorney who spoke at the committee hearing and posting a video clip of Quinn’s comment. ""The point is South Carolina legislators believe it, and are convinced this is going to happen,"" Cook told us. Quinn, indeed, had added an amendment to the South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act to prevent state workers from conducting any ""involuntary … in-home visitation."" It passed the House, but the Senate didn’t have a chance to vote. Cook says lawmakers hope to revive the legislation in the next session. But that Obamacare program that worries Quinn? It already is — by statute — voluntary. There’s literally nothing to suggest raids or weapons. Home visiting programs Concerned bloggers pointed to an Obamacare-funded grant program for ""maternal, infant and early childhood home visiting."" In 2011, the government announced $224 million in funding. Most of those grants are going to health departments — none, so far, in South Carolina. The idea: fund visits from nurses and social workers to high-risk families to help them develop skills to keep kids healthy, get them ready for school, and prevent child abuse and neglect. Home-visit programs already existed in 40 states. But to Kent Masterson Brown, a health care litigator invited by South Carolina lawmakers to help them avoid implementing Obamacare, the programs suggest overzealous nonprofits telling parents how to raise their children without their consent. Brown raises the specter of a home-schooling family subject to ""intervention"" for school readiness, their children forced into schools and onto medications and vaccines. ""The federal government will now set the standards for raising children and will enforce them by home visits,"" he wrote about the law. But consent is built into the program. A home visitor could no more compel a family to vaccinate kids than a pediatrician could, said Kay Johnson, a professor of pediatrics at Dartmouth Medical School who’s one of the nation’s experts on state home visiting policy. Here’s what the Affordable Care Act says: Home-visiting programs must assure they’ll have procedures that ensure ""the participation of each eligible family in the program is voluntary."" Here’s how that might work, according to Sara Rosenbaum, a professor of health law and policy at George Washington University, who supports such programs. A low-income mom gets her prenatal care at a community health center. Her doctor asks if she would like visits from a nurse after the baby comes to offer tips and answer questions. Mom could say yes — or no. It’s like the old days of health care, Rosenbaum said, when nurses would visit families to show how to breastfeed, sterilize bottles, care for babies and cope when you’re exhausted. ""It's real health education in the home, is the purpose of it,"" she said. Such programs have a long history backed by peer-reviewed research, she said. They work. ""They make sure that you don't go home to nothing. It's done to help families, not to police them."" A classic randomized trial in Elmira, N.Y., showed nurse visits to families of newborns reduced child abuse and neglect, even years later. They also reduced government spending for low-income unmarried women. Brown, the lawyer, says he’s concerned families have no protection from social workers. He’s concerned workers won’t be well-trained and will overstep families’ rights. Nobody should knock on your door without a badge, he said. ""What I see in this is a monster, frankly. And you can quote me on that,"" he said. That’s the fear. The law, however, specifies that programs be voluntary, their staffs trained and supervised, and the home-visiting models they follow based on strong research. Any ""forced home inspection"" wouldn’t be under the law — it would be in direct opposition to it. And if a family welcomed help but later decided it made them uncomfortable? Samantha Miller, a spokeswoman for the U.S. agency administering the program, said families could stop accepting services ""without consequence at any time and for any reason."" Our ruling Bloggers passed around a claim last week that a provision of the new health care law will allow ""forced"" home inspections by government agents. But the program they pointed to provides grants for voluntary help to at-risk families from trained staff like nurses and social workers. What bloggers describe would be an egregious abuse of the law — not what’s allowed by it." Claim: "Obamacare provision will allow ""forced home inspections"" by government agents."

A: 0
****
Q: Paragraph: As the criminal case moves toward possible trial this year, related pending lawsuits reflect a battle over blame. A look at where things stand: THE ALLEGATIONS  The Columbus-area Mount Carmel Health System determined William Husel ordered excessive doses for nearly three dozen patients over several years, though it said the doses likely weren’t what caused six of those deaths. Reviewers found that in many cases, the drugs were accessed by overriding a dispensing system. Husel was fired in December 2018, weeks after a concern was raised. Mount Carmel later said three patients died during those weeks after receiving excessive doses he ordered. ___ CRIMINAL CASE  Last June, Husel was charged with murder in 25 deaths and pleaded not guilty in one of the biggest cases of its kind ever brought against a U.S. health care professional. He was charged only in cases involving 500 to 2,000 micrograms of the powerful painkiller fentanyl – doses so unusually large that prosecutors said it indicated an intent to snuff out lives. His initial lawyer said Husel was providing comfort care to dying patients, not trying to kill them. Husel’s current lawyers in the criminal case — including Florida-based Jose Baez, who is known for successfully defending high-profile clients such as Casey Anthony and Aaron Hernandez — haven’t said much publicly about his motives. Husel’s lawyers in civil cases contend that he provided appropriate care and that Mount Carmel misled the public about what happened. Mount Carmel publicly apologized, tightened its drug policies, fired other employees and changed leadership but has stood by its investigation and subsequent decisions. “There is nothing more important to us than our patients’ safety and their trust in us — and we will do everything in our power to continue to improve,” it said in an emailed statement Tuesday. Trial for Husel, 44, is currently scheduled for June. _____ LOTS OF LAWSUITS  More than 30 lawsuits have been filed against Mount Carmel in the matter, and it has agreed to more than $13 million in related settlements so far. Husel and Mount Carmel unsuccessfully argued the remaining lawsuits should be put on hold until the criminal case is resolved. Husel also has filed lawsuits. One against Mount Carmel and its parent company, Michigan-based Trinity Health, alleges defamation. Another against Trinity and its insurer seeks to force them to cover costs of his defense in the criminal case, just as in civil cases against him. _____ FORMER COLLEAGUES  Authorities aren’t prosecuting those who administered the drugs, though they have faced other fallout. Mount Carmel said it fired 23 nurses, pharmacists and managers after its internal investigation. Ten of Husel’s former colleagues recently sued Mount Carmel for defamation and, in some cases, wrongful termination. The group of mostly nurses decried a “ false narrative of an evil rogue doctor and his complicit staff” and said the spread of that narrative damaged their lives and livelihoods regardless of whether they were fired. Three pharmacists and 25 nurses still face potential disciplinary action from their respective state boards and have administrative hearings scheduled in the coming months. Husel is in line for one, too, after the Ohio State Medical Board suspended his license. It hadn’t previously disciplined him. ___ Follow Franko on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/kantele10. Claim: Amid doc’s murder case, lawsuits reflect battle over blame.

A:
2
****