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.

Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: "Senate Republicans’ surprise move to repeal the requirement to have health insurance into their tax reform bill revealed numbers that few people had noted before. (The mandate says that everyone must have coverage or face a fine.) ""80 percent of the tax falls on those who make $50,000 a year or less,"" Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., told Fox News Nov. 15. ""We’re taking a failed policy that punishes people with taxes -- low-income people. (We’re) taking that tax away, giving them tax relief there, and then ploughing that back into tax relief for middle-income families."" This was no throw-away line. Thune is the third-ranking Republican in the party’s Senate leadership, and his colleagues delivered similar versions of the talking point throughout the day. In 2016, the fine for not having insurance stood at $695 for adults. The formula has a few wrinkles that brought the maximum penalty to $2,085 for a family, or 2.5 percent of income, whichever was larger. Going forward, it rises with inflation (unless of course, Congress repeals it). Not everyone without insurance has to pay the fine. The list of exemptions is long. It includes a family with income under $20,800; people who have suffered domestic violence in the household; anyone who has suffered the death of a close family member; someone who has received a utility shut-off notice, and more. Thune’s office said he got his information from 2015 data from the Internal Revenue Service. In one key sense, Thune is correct. Out of all the tax returns sent to the IRS that included a payment of the fine, 79 percent came from households making $50,000 a year or less. (Technically, the income is adjusted gross income, which understates actual income. But on average, the adjustment makes little difference for this check.) However, Thune didn’t specify that he was talking about the number of people. His description of the tax could just as equally refer to the dollars paid. The government collected a little over $3 billion from about 6.6 million households. Of that, about $1.8 billion, 60 percent, came from households with incomes under $50,000. So in dollar terms, about 60 percent of the tax fell on people in that income range, not the 80 percent that Thune said. Thune’s communications staff told us he was talking about the number of people and the number of returns. We reached several health care and tax researchers, and none of them challenged the core numbers. Gordon Mermin with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center ran the numbers and found that as a percentage of income, the tax fell heaviest on the $25,000 to $50,000 group. On average, that group paid 3.1 percent of income. Mermin told us households in this range are more likely to lack insurance, and due to their incomes, are less likely to be able to claim an exemption from the fine. ""People shouldn’t be surprised the $25,000 to $50,000 group is affected the most,"" Mermin said. But researchers found it odd that people making less than $25,000 had paid as much as they did. The $10,000 to $25,000 group accounted for 22 percent of the payments, and about 36 percent of the households. ""Folks are just making a mistake,"" said Jonathan Gruber, one of the architects of Obamacare and an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ""Given the exemptions, there is no way such low-income folks should be paying."" The IRS knows this has happened. It’s been sending out letters since 2015, telling filers ""it appears that you may have reported owing too much Health Care Shared Responsibility Payment,"" the penalty’s formal name. ""The IRS has reached out to some taxpayers to let them know they’ve overpaid the penalty, but they don’t have the capacity to do that in all cases,"" said Tara Straw at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning think tank. Straw said the IRS targets people who automatically qualify for an exemption because of their income, a factor that is stronger in states that did not expand Medicaid to people making 138 percent of federal poverty. Where the IRS effort falls short, she said, relates to personal circumstances such as a death in the family or a utility service cut-off notice. Larry Levitt at the Kaiser Family Foundation, a neutral source of health care data, also agreed that ""there certainly appear to be some low-income people paying the penalty who could be claiming an exemption."" A just-released study from Kaiser suggests the number could be large. The report found that about 5 million uninsured people could get coverage for less than the cost of the penalty. Thanks to the subsidies in Obamacare, the lowest-level plans would be free to many of those people, or if not free, available at a very low cost. If  everyone took advantage of those subsidies, the 6.6 million households paying the penalty because they lack coverage would fall significantly. We don’t know how the numbers would shake out because about 4 million people neither paid the fine nor told the IRS that they had coverage. Republicans offer the repeal of the penalty as a boon to working Americans, and for some it would be. But the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan analytic arm of Congress, has found that removing the penalty makes it less likely that people will seek out insurance, even if it would be free or very affordable. Thune said that 80 percent of the individual mandate penalty falls on those who make $50,000 a year or less. In terms of the number of returns in which people paid the fine, that figure is correct. In terms of the dollars collected, it overshoots the mark. People in that income range account for about 60 percent of the payments. Still, an independent analysis showed that households in the $25,000 to 50,000 income range paid the highest percentage of income on the penalty. There’s strong evidence that many lower income people are paying the fine by mistake, and millions could both avoid it and gain health coverage for less than the cost of the fine. But as far as who is paying the fine." Claim: 80 percent of the (individual mandate) tax falls on those who make $50,000 a year or less.

Output: Thune said that 80 percent of the individual mandate penalty falls on those who make $50,000 a year or less. In terms of the number of returns in which people paid the fine, that figure is correct. In terms of the dollars collected, it overshoots the mark. People in that income range account for about 60 percent of the payments. Still, an independent analysis showed that households in the $25,000 to 50,000 income range paid the highest percentage of income on the penalty. There’s strong evidence that many lower income people are paying the fine by mistake, and millions could both avoid it and gain health coverage for less than the cost of the fine. But as far as who is paying the fine. 


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: Rwanda briefly closed its border with Congo over the virus outbreak in the city of more than 2 million as the painstaking work of finding, tracking and vaccinating people who had contact with the man — and the contacts of those contacts — began. The man died on Wednesday after spending several days at home with his large family while showing symptoms. Congo’s presidency said the entire family was at “high risk” and in quarantine. The Ebola coordinator for North Kivu province, Dr. Aruna Abedi, confirmed the wife’s case to The Associated Press hours after that of the child. “We’re seeing the first active transmission chain in Goma and expect more to come,” the International Rescue Committee’s Ebola response director, Andre Heller, warned in a statement. This outbreak has killed more than 1,800 people, nearly a third of them children. It is now the second-deadliest Ebola outbreak in history, and last month the World Health Organization declared it a rare global emergency. Rwanda’s state minister for foreign affairs, Olivier Nduhungirehe, confirmed the border closure, a day after WHO officials praised African nations for keeping their borders open. Last week Saudi Arabia stopped issuing visas to people from Congo, citing the Ebola outbreak, shortly before the annual hajj pilgrimage there this month. Congo’s presidency condemned Rwanda’s decision, and Congolese at the busy frontier expressed frustration. “I can’t understand why they don’t just test us instead of closing these borders,” said Angel Murhula, who works in Rwanda. Several hours later Congo’s presidency said the border had reopened. A Rwanda health ministry statement called the events a “traffic slowdown” as surveillance for Ebola was reinforced. The ministry advised against unnecessary travel to the Goma area. WHO has recommended against travel restrictions amid the outbreak but says the risk of regional spread is “very high.” Any border closure is likely to push people to avoid official crossings equipped with hand-washing stations and where people are checked for signs of fever or other Ebola symptoms. In June, three people who crossed on an unguarded footpath into Uganda died there before their family members were taken back to Congo for treatment. The death Wednesday in Goma “in such a dense population center underscores the very real risk of further disease transmission, perhaps beyond the country’s borders,” United Nations agencies said in a joint statement marking a year of the outbreak. The man in his 40s was a miner returning from an area of northeastern Ituri province, Mongwalu, where no Ebola cases in this outbreak have been recorded, WHO said. He was exposed to the virus along the roughly 300-mile-long (490-kilometer) route from the city of Komanda to Goma as he took motor taxis over a number of days through the densely populated region at the heart of the outbreak. The man arrived in Goma on July 13 and started showing symptoms on July 22. He was isolated at an Ebola treatment center on Tuesday. He had spent five days being treated at home before going to a health facility, where Ebola was suspected. Symptoms can start to occur between two and 21 days from infection, health experts say. “He may not even have been aware of the exposure that he had,” WHO emergencies chief Dr. Michael Ryan said Wednesday. Symptoms such as fever can be confused with malaria, which is endemic in the region. Congo’s new Ebola response coordinator, Jean-Jacques Muyembe, has said there appears to be no link between the case and a previous one in Goma announced two and a half weeks ago. That case was a 46-year-old preacher who managed to pass through three health checkpoints on the way from Butembo, one of the communities hardest hit by this outbreak. The declaration of a global health emergency — the fifth in history —came days after that first Goma case. It has brought a surge of millions of dollars in new pledges by international donors, but some health workers say a new approach is needed to combat misunderstandings in a part of Congo that had never experienced Ebola before. Health workers responding to the outbreak have been attacked, even killed, in a region where rebel groups are active and the population is wary of outsiders. There is no licensed treatment for Ebola, which is spread by close contact with bodily fluids of those infected, and survival can depend on seeking treatment as quickly as possible. And yet many people in the region don’t believe that the virus is real, health workers have said. This outbreak is second only to the 2014-16 Ebola outbreak in West Africa that left more than 11,300 people dead. ___ Ssuuna reported from Kigali, Rwanda. Associated Press writer Al-Hadji Kudra Maliro contributed. ___ Follow Africa news at https://twitter.com/AP_Africa Claim: 1-year-old daughter, wife of Congo’s Goma victim have Ebola.

Output: The wife and 1-year-old daughter of the man who died of Ebola in Goma this week have tested positive for the disease, health officials confirmed Thursday, the first transmission of the virus inside the densely populated crossroads city on the border with Rwanda, a scenario that health experts have long feared.


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: The report, written by the Guttmacher Institute and part-funded by the United Nations Population Fund UNFPA, described “a staggering lack of basic sexual and reproductive health services in developing countries” which leaves 225 million women who want to avoid pregnancy without access to modern contraceptives. It also found that tens of millions of women do not receive the basic pregnancy and delivery care needed to protect their own and their babies’ health. Babatunde Osotimehin, UNFPA’S executive director, urged all governments to put women’s right to choose how many children to have and when at the heart of national health services. “We know what to do and we know how to do it,” he told a briefing in London. “These investments save lives, empower women and girls, strengthen health systems and have a profound and lasting impact on development.”  Analysing data from Africa, Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean, the report said it would cost on average $25 per woman aged between 15 and 49 — roughly double the current level of spending — to provide essential sexual health services to all women in developing countries each year. These include contraception advice and services, pregnancy and newborn care, HIV care including medicines to help prevent mother-to-child transmission of the virus, and treatments for four other sexually transmitted infections. Providing these to all women who need them in developing countries would have a dramatic impact, it said — cutting unintended pregnancies by 70 percent, unsafe abortions by 74 percent, dramatically reducing maternal and newborn deaths and virtually eliminating mother-to-baby HIV transmission. “This is an affordable goal that will have a dramatic impact,” said Ann Starrs, CEO of the Guttmacher Institute. While the report was loaded with numbers, she said it was critical “to keep in mind the people behind the statistics”. “That includes adolescent girls, married or not, who know that pregnancy right now will mean the end of their schooling and, very likely, the end of their dreams for a better life. “And women who have already four, five or six children and know that they cannot afford to bear and raise another one.”  (Refiles to clarify report’s authorship) Claim: Sexual health report says $25 per woman per year would reduce deaths.


Output: Spending $25 per woman per year on full sexual health services would dramatically reduce mother and baby deaths and give women the choice of smaller, healthier and more productive families, a UN-backed report found on Thursday.