Problem: (CNN) -- Women seeking an abortion in Texas will have to view a picture of the embryo or fetus and hear a description of its development before having the procedure, under a law that takes effect September 1. The bill stirred some controversy in Texas, but it easily passed through the state House and Senate, both of which are controlled by Republicans. It was signed into law Thursday by Republican Gov. Rick Perry. The law says that at least 24 hours before an abortion is performed, women must undergo a sonogram, a procedure that uses ultrasound to create an image. The doctor, then, is required to give, "in a manner understandable to a layperson, a verbal explanation of the results of the sonogram images, including a medical description of the dimensions of the embryo or fetus, the presence of cardiac activity, and the presence of external members and internal organs," the law states. There are some exceptions, including pregnancies that resulted from sexual assault, incest or other violations of law. Women seeking abortions also are exempt if the fetus has been found to have an irreversible medical condition that will cause a disability. "Governor Perry was pleased to sign this important legislation, which bolsters our efforts to protect life by ensuring Texans are fully informed when considering such an important decision," said his deputy press secretary, Lucy Nashed. Critics say the new law is unnecessary. "What no one is focusing on is that this is a mandate to humiliate women who want an abortion," said Yvonne Gutierrez, vice president for public affairs at the Planned Parenthood Trust of South Texas. Texas already requires a 24-hour consent period, and the new law will simply add emotional and financial costs to those seeking abortions, she said.

Question: "Why do critics feel the law is unnecessary?"

Answer: "Women who wane to get abortion will go to a different state"
Answer: no

Problem: The Legal Services Corp. (LSC), a quasi-governmental agency that provides legal aid for the poor, would receive $329 million in fiscal 2004 under President Bush's proposal - the same amount requested in 2003 and approved for 2002 and 2001. If approved, the hold-the-line request for LSC means its budget would erode with inflation for another year, but it could be worse for the organization: Many conservatives fought for years to do away with the LSC altogether, saying legal services attorneys were spending too much time fighting for liberal causes or pursuing politically charged cases against the government instead of representing the needy. Opposition to the organization has cooled since 1996, when Congress approved restrictions (PL 104-134) on the sorts of cases federally funded legal aid attorneys can take. (1996 Almanac, p. 5-36) Republicans cut the organization's budget deeply in 1996, but its funding has recovered slowly. Last month, in the omnibus spending bill for fiscal 2003, the Senate added a onetime increase of $19 million, which, if approved in the final version, would bring the LSC budget to $348 million. The money would go to help states, such as Michigan and Ohio, that lost money when the organization redistributed its funding based on census counts made in 2000 of poor households. If the extra money survives a conference with the House and makes it to the president's desk, LSC supporters may try to include it in the organization's fiscal 2004 funding. The federal government began funding some programs to provide legal assistance to the poor in the late 1960s; the Legal Services Corporation was created in 1974 (PL 93-355). LSC gives nearly all its money to state and local agencies, which provide civil legal assistance to those whose income is less than 125 percent of the federal poverty level - $11,075 a year for an individual and $22,625 for a family of four. Funding for legal services goes to defend needy clients in domestic violence cases, custody cases and other such matters, according to LSC. Since 1996, lawyers who receive money from Legal Services have been prohibited from such activities as lobbying legislatures, filing class-action suits, participating in political demonstrations or strikes, pursuing abortion-related litigation, representing illegal aliens or prisoners, or defending public housing tenants evicted because they were charged with selling drugs

Question: "Which political party cut the LSC's budget?"

Answer: "Republican"
Answer: yes

Problem: Roma captain Francesco Totti set a new Serie A scoring record on Saturday as his side demolished Cesena 5-1. Two early goals from the 35-year-old striker saw him reach a total of 211 goals for Roma, which means he has scored more goals for one club than any other player in Serie A history. His tally sees him surpass the previous record of 210 set by the prolific Swedish striker Gunnar Nordahl who played for AC Milan in the 1950s. "It's what I've always wanted, to wear this shirt and beat one record after another," said Totti, AFP reported. "I've overtaken Nordahl and I'm proud of that. Now I'm aiming for Altafini," he added, AFP reported. Brazilian Jose Altafini is the joint third highest scorer (along with Giuseppe Meazza) in Serie A history with 216 goals. Totti's early brace and a goal from Fabio Borini put Roma 3-0 up with only eight minutes played. Juan and Miralem Pjanic added further goals in the second half after CM Eder had pulled a goal back for Cesena on the hour mark. The win lifts Roma to sixth -- although Napoli will overtake them again if they win at Siena on Sunday -- and boosts their chances of qualifying for European football next season. Cesena, however, remain mired in trouble hovering just above the foot of the table in 18th place with 15 points.

Question: "After Nordahl, whose record does Francesco want to beat?"

Answer: "Jose Altafini"
Answer:
yes