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.

[EX Q]: "The Clinton Foundation might be committed to doing good around the world, but Hillary Clinton's critics see it as a ripe target to bring down the presumptive Democratic nominee. Republican Donald Trump recently charged that some countries who gave money to the foundation received favorable treatment in return. For anyone who hasn't heard about the Clinton Foundation, it's the signature project to reduce poverty and improve global health created by former President Bill Clinton. It is part matchmaker, helping wealthy donors connect with doers, and part active participant, directly running programs, especially in health care. In an interview with Hillary Clinton, CNN's Anderson Cooper quoted Trump and asked if her husband would break all ties with the foundation, should she become president. Clinton said she would cross that bridge ""if we come to it,"" and proceeded to give a full-throated defense of the foundation. ""I'm proud of the work that it has done,"" Clinton said in the June 8, 2016, interview. ""Nine million people have lower-cost HIV/AIDS medicine because of the work of the Clinton Foundation and my husband. We have women across the country, from Latin America and Africa -- across the world, I mean -- getting good jobs, and being able to support themselves for the first time."" We'll focus on the first part of that statement and explore if the Clinton Foundation actually had a hand in making HIV/AIDS drugs more affordable for 9 million people? The foundation's work on HIV/AIDS treatment dates back to 2002 with the creation of the Clinton Health Access Initiative. That was a time when some countries were paying $1,000 or more to treat each AIDS patient. The basic goal was to bring in bulk-buying to lower costs. The program consolidated both the supply of raw materials to make the drugs and the bidding to supply the finished product. The result was lower production costs and lower drug prices. Today, the initiative tracks the going price for a menu of treatments and posts them to help health departments around the world as they negotiate with drug companies. In 2014, the World Health Organization reported that by the end of 2013, more than 11.7 million people were on antiretroviral therapy in low- and middle-income countries. While the kinds of drugs have changed, the WHO said ""in the past decade the price of individual antiretroviral formulations has decreased considerably."" The treatments used in the early days have fallen from a median cost of about $600 in 2003 to about $100 a decade later. A more advanced drug combination introduced in 2005 saw a similar decline. Importantly, the WHO listed the Clinton Health Access Initiative as one of a handful of organizations collaborating on ensuring a steady supply of drugs. The partners in that effort include the biggest players, including several United Nations agencies, PEPFAR (the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) and UNITAID, a project created by Brazil, Chile, France, Norway and the United Kingdom. UNAIDS announced at the end of May that the number of people under treatment is now closer to 17 million. Technically, the Clinton Health Access Initiative has been a separate nonprofit since 2010, but it is still integrated within the Clinton Foundation and the foundation press office still offers comments on its behalf. Clinton Health Access Initiativespokeswoman Maura Daley told us that Clinton used an old figure for the people being served by the initiative. ""The total number of patients benefitting is 11.8 million,"" she told us. Not everyone getting treatment is counted as benefiting from the initiative's efforts. Beyond working to reduce drug costs, it also coordinates with nongovernmental organizations inside countries to distribute the drugs once they arrive. Clearly, the Clinton Health Access Initiative did not accomplish all of this on its own, but Clinton didn't say that. Two experts in HIV/AIDS treatment, Jennifer Kates at the Kaiser Family Foundation, and Ellen 't Hoen call the initiative an important player. 't Hoen was the first executive director of the Medicines Patent Pool, a group that streamlines the production of generic antiretroviral drugs. ""Without the work of the MPP it would have been much harder for organizations like CHAI to access generic antiretrovirals,"" she said. The initiative has been faulted for failing to fully report donations from foreign governmentsand has filed amended returns for 2012 and 2013. Our ruling Clinton said 9 million people have lower-cost HIV/AIDS medicine thanks to the efforts of the Clinton Foundation and her husband. Bill Clinton started the foundation and its first big project was the Clinton Health Access Initiative. The program focused on using market mechanisms to reduce treatment costs. Costs have fallen dramatically and the initiative remains a key global player in maintaining a steady supply of affordable drugs. If anything, Clinton understated the number of people who have benefited from the program.
[EX A]: Nine million people have lower-cost HIV/AIDS medicine because of the work of the Clinton Foundation and my husband.

[EX Q]: "Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, campaigning for re-election, tweeted a parody of President Barack Obama promoting his signature health-care law. Around midday Dec. 12, 2013, the official White House Twitter account posted a photo of Obama holding a sign urging Americans to get health coverage because ""nobody should go broke just because they get sick."" Social media denizens started creating versions that rewrote the sign's text; Dewhurst's had Obama saying, ""I want more of Texans' private data."" Some perspective: Texas in 2012 had approximately 19.5 million insured residents and 5.2 million legal residents without insurance according to a March 18, 2013, report by the state Health and Human Services Commission. Does the Obamacare law demand private data on them that wasn't known to the government before? PolitiFact reporters have checked out several claims about how the Affordable Care Act's online marketplaces will handle personal information. Many of the concerns addressed are about how government agencies will share information they already collect -- and how secure that information will be. As part of a May 2013 fact-check, PolitiFact in Washington, D.C., reported that a federal ""data hub"" resulting from the 2010 law would pull information from government agencies, but not expand federal data collection. For example, the Social Security Administration is asked to verify a person's Social Security number, and the IRS confirms financial data to see if a person is eligible for a subsidy. PolitiFact in D.C. gave a False rating Sept. 19, 2013, to a claim by former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey that ""Obamacare will question your sex life,"" finding that nothing in the health care law required such questions. So what information does the government collect under the Obamacare law? If you apply to shop in the federal online insurance marketplace or the marketplace for your state, you'll supply information on yourself and perhaps family members, some of which the government already has. Healthcare.gov offers a checklist for people preparing to fill out applications, whether online or printed: Social Security number, employer, income, current insurance policy numbers and information about your employer's insurance plans (if any). Such answers will help determine whether you're eligible to buy insurance through the marketplaces and if you can get free- or reduced-cost coverage via tax credits, Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program. The standardized family application asks for information on you and everyone who lives with you, including whether you are pregnant and how many babies you're expecting, whether you have a health condition that limits daily activities, whether you live in a nursing home and whether you were in foster care after age 18. Other questions concern employment, military service, sources of income, tax deductions taken and whether you are American Indian or Alaska Native. A Sept. 18, 2013, fact sheet from the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said, ""Personal health information (PHI) will be requested only when it is needed to complete the application and make an eligibility determination for health coverage options."" Health privacy expert Deven McGraw told us by email that the applications do collect some information the government did not already have, but said it's the same type of information gathered when people apply for public coverage such as Medicaid. ""They are questions that are specifically designed to match eligibility criteria. So none of it is extraneous,"" said McGraw, director of the health privacy project at the Center for Democracy and Technology, which advocates for Internet freedom. And, she said, the data can't be used for any purposes other than the marketplaces' functions. More information about you could come, the fact sheet says, from ""common federal data sources including the Social Security Administration (SSA), Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and Department of Homeland Security (DHS)."" Wait -- Homeland Security? According to the National Immigration Law Center's website, applicants who are not U.S. citizens will have their status verified through a Homeland/U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service database. Agencies already use the web service, called Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE), to determine immigrants' eligibility for benefits including Medicaid, housing loans and unemployment. Via email, Social Security spokeswoman Kia Anderson told us her agency can, when CMS needs the information to determine eligibility, provide applicants' ID numbers, citizenship data, death or disability indicators and Social Security income and coverage earned. So the application process puts together some information the government already had with some it didn't have. People who aren't applying to shop in the marketplaces but are subject to the Obamacare law's mandate will also be sharing some new information with Uncle Sam. The mandate to have or get insurance applies, according to the immigration law center, to all U.S. citizens, naturalized citizens and legal immigrants. Via email, IRS spokeswoman Lea Crusberg said 2014 tax returns will ask whether you have health coverage that meets the new standards or an exemption, whether you got coverage through an Obamacare marketplace and whether you got a tax credit to help defray the cost. The law's new tax payments and credits will also be on returns, of course. In 2015, Crusberg said, the IRS will start collecting coverage information from insurance providers. Employers who insure their own workers in-house will report which employees are enrolled and give enough information so the IRS can tell if those workers are due a tax credit. Self-insuring employers will also put the cost of the plan they're providing on W-2 forms so workers can see it. Is the new data ""private"" information? Per the CMS fact sheet, Obamacare applicants could be asked to cough up some personal health information. But the fact sheet also says the marketplaces' systems ""will not store this information"" -- which casts some doubt on whether the government is really ""collecting"" it, but serves as an indication that it's considered sensitive. How about when the IRS asks where your insurance comes from, whether you got a tax credit for it and whether it meets the Obamacare law's standards? Generally, the IRS regards what you put on your tax return as private. For example, tax preparers who disclose such information without your consent can face criminal charges. Final IRS regulations governing who can disclose what tax return information to HHS under the Obamacare law were issued Aug. 13, 2013. An FAQ posted by the IRS that day said that ""officers and employees of the IRS will disclose to HHS, the Marketplace, and state agencies only, upon written request and subject to strict privacy and security rules, certain return information ... for the purpose of determining eligibility for certain health care affordability programs."" Our ruling Dewhurst said Obama wants ""more of Texans' private data."" The subset of Texans shopping for coverage through the online marketplace are providing additional private data for a reason: to ensure they're qualified. Dewhurst's statement overlooks these aspects. Regardless, many more Texans will be asked to give the IRS information about their health coverage that was previously not requested. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information."
[EX A]: "In altered photo, says Barack Obama wants ""more of Texans' private data"" via health care."

[EX Q]: Roughly half of Yellowstone's 4,600 bison are estimated to have been exposed to brucellosis, a bacterial infection that can sometimes cause cows and bison to miscarry. Worries that infected bison may endanger cattle in states such as Montana that border Yellowstone had prompted the powerful ranching lobby to endorse biobullets - absorbable projectiles packed with vaccine. They would cut disease rates among bison by as much as 35 percent over 30 years. The proposal was the latest decades-long efforts to ease conflicts between livestock interests and wildlife advocates over management of Yellowstone bison. Park officials said they decided against the remote vaccination program because of its $9 million price tag, questions about its effectiveness and the possible impact on the millions of visitors who flock to the park to view iconic Western wildlife like bison. The measure would have required shooting the animals once a year for three decades, raising questions about how increased human interaction could affect bison within the wild herd. "We have concerns about how that repeated contact might impact bison behavior and their visibility to park visitors," said Yellowstone spokesman Al Nash. Nash said there was no documented case of wild bison transmitting brucellosis to cattle, which he said signifies the success of existing measures designed to separate the park's herd from domestic livestock. Those practices include returning bison that leave the park, testing and vaccinating bison that leave Yellowstone, and slaughtering some infected animals. Errol Rice, executive vice president of the Montana Stockgrowers Association, said the threats posed by infected bison to Montana's brucellosis-free certification, which protects the market value of cattle, warranted using biobullets. He said the program would have lessened the public outcry that erupts when wandering bison are corralled and shipped to slaughterhouses. "The capture and removal of bison has been a challenging issue for the park and Montana. Remote vaccination would have helped alleviate the public relations burden we have to deal with when bison migrate out of Yellowstone," he said. Stephany Seay, spokeswoman for Buffalo Field Campaign, a bison advocacy group, applauded the park's decision not to shoot bison with vaccine. "It was a mismanagement scheme based on a livestock model. We don't vaccinate skunks against rabies or mosquitoes against West Nile virus," she said.
[EX A]:
Yellowstone managers reject vaccinating bison with biobullets.