TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: A much e-mailed piece about pink-clad prisoners of the Maricopa County Jail was extracted from a July 2003 Associated Press offering about the Summer 2003 heat wave's effect on the Phoenix area. Those few paragraphs devoted to describing the condition of the inmates held in that jail went on to be widely circulated on the Internet although they formed only the smallest portion of the original piece, an article that described the air's heat creating turbulence for airplanes overhead, car windshields shattering or falling out, dogs burning their paws on the pavement, and candles melting indoors: It's even hotter than usual in Phoenix, the Associated Press reports: About 2,000 inmates living in a barbed-wire-surrounded tent encampment at the Maricopa County Jail have been given permission to strip down to their government-issued pink boxer shorts. On Wednesday, hundreds of men wearing boxers were either curled up on their bunk beds or chatted in the tents, which reached 138 degrees inside the week before. Many were also swathed in wet, pink towels as sweat collected on their chests and dripped down to their pink socks. "It feels like you are in a furnace," said James Zanzo't, an inmate who has lived in the tents for 1 1/2 years. "It's inhumane." Joe Arpaio, the tough-guy sheriff who created the tent city and long ago started making his prisoners wear pink, is not sympathetic. He said Wednesday that he told the inmates: "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and the soldiers are living in tents and they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your mouths. " KIND OF PUTS THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE DOESN'T IT? A clue as to the 'why' of the selective quoting is contained in the tagline now often part of the forwards: "Kind of puts things in perspective doesn't it?" Someone was struck by the comparison of the kvetching prisoners to the (presumed uncomplaining) troops serving in Iraq, and was moved to excerpt only that portion of the article to share with others. That the forward has proved as popular as it has shows the comparison resonates with a great many. The U.S. soldiers serving in Iraq may well be bona fide tough-as-nails servicemen, but at least in our mental image of them we also need them to be larger than life. We like to think of them as lantern-jawed heroes coolly dealing with the impossible situation that is Iraq without giving so much as a thought to their personal safety or even letting as little as a complaining word fall from their lips about the miserable conditions they must endure during that tour of duty. The juxtaposition of these brave soldiers to the societal dregs that wash up into a county jail is thus eminently satisfying to contemplate it's the comparison of giants to ants, working to exalt the one even as it makes the other look petty and small. Yet if the prisoners housed in Arizona's Maricopa County tent city jails were complaining, they had some good reasons. At that facility the incarcerated were fed only two meals a day, with green bologna sometimes appearing on the menu. They were quartered in outdoor tents under sweltering conditions, and they slept on cots which lack pillows. They worked on chain gangs. And they wore pink underwear. Former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, of the "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and the soldiers are living in tents and they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your mouths" quote, reveled in the sobriquet 'America's Toughest Sheriff.' He enjoyed a very high voter approval rating for a time and had little trouble being re-elected to his post multiple times. He was a controversial figure, vilified by some and worshipped by others. In June 2004 the e-mailed excerpt from the July 2003 Associated Press article circulated anew on the Internet, this time prefaced as follows: This is the way he is, and he has been re-elected several times Sheriff Joe Arpaio (in Arizona) is doing it RIGHT!! : He has jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates for them. He stopped smoking and porno magazines in the jails. Took away their weights. Cut off all but "G" movies. He started chain gangs so the inmates could do free work on county and city projects. Then he started chain gangs for women so he wouldn't get sued for discrimination. He took away cable TV until he found out there was a federal court order that required cable TV for jails. So he hooked up the cable TV again but only let in the Disney channel and the weather channel. When asked why the weather channel he replied, so they will know how hot it's gonna be while they are working on my chain gangs. He cut off coffee since it has zero nutritional value. When the inmates complained, he told them. this is a good one"This isn't the Ritz/Carlton. If you don't like it, don't come back." He bought Newt Gingrich' lecture series on videotape that he pipes into the jails. When asked by a reporter if he had any lecture series by a Democrat, he replied that a democratic lecture series might explain why a lot of the inmates were in his jails in the first place. You have to love this guy!! More on the AZ Sheriff [at this point, the text quoted above was repeated] With one exception (which could simply amount to no more than our not having yet found the right supporting articles), the claims made in the 2004 preface checked out. Sheriff Joe Arpaio did ban smoking, coffee, pornographic magazines, movies, and unrestricted television in all his jails. Those incarcerated in his tent city jail did indeed work on chain gangs, pull weeds for the city and county, clear brush, and the like. In 1996 the Sheriff put the nation's first female chain gang to work. Although the e-mailed account made it sound as if he did so out of fear of prosecution for discrimination, there was no such threat lurking in the background he chose that course of action because it suited his beliefs: "I don't believe in discrimination in my jail system. Crime knows no gender and neither should punishment," he said. Regarding the claim about his airing a Newt Gingrich lecture series on the jail's television system, in 1995 the controversial lawman used canteen funds to buy the Republican House speaker's 10-part, $150 video lecture series with the intent of piping it into the inmates' cells. When asked if he'd also be providing those in his charge with a lecture series done by a Democrat, he replied in the negative. "For one thing I don't know of any," he said. "And some people might say these guys already got enough of those ideas." He was also proud of having lowered the cost of feeding inmates in his care. Though assorted news articles quoted slightly differing figures, a 40 per serving expenditure was the one most often touted. "It costs more to feed our police dogs than our inmates. The dogs never committed a crime, and they're working for a living," Arpaio said. In 1998 Arpaio instituted a policy of charging inmates for their meals, levying a dollar-a-day tariff against each of those incarcerated. In 1994 he banned coffee from the Maricopa County Jail, but he did so not because of its lack of nutritional value, but to protect inmates and guards from hot-coffee assaults by other inmates and to lower costs. (By eliminating the estimated 5,000 cups of coffee served daily for 5,400 inmates, it was expected the county would save $94,158 a year.) The one item we have yet to validate is the assertion that Arpaio deprived inmates of cable TV until discovery that such act was in violation of a federal court order. We've yet to locate this order or to confirm that television programming was ever denied those in his care. It is on record, however, that inmates in his charge view only selected programming, such as what's on The Weather Channel. ("I think my chain gang deserves to know how hot it is when they hit the streets," said Arpaio.) In September 2007 the following e-mail forwards about Sheriff Arpaio began to circulate: Sheriff Joe is at it again. Maricopa County was spending approx. $18 million dollars a year on stray animals, like cats and dogs. Sheriff Joe offered to take the department over, and the County Supervisors said "Okay." The animal shelters are now all staffed and operated by prisoners. They feed and care for the strays. Every animal in his care is taken out and walked twice daily. He now has prisoners who are experts in animal nutrition and behavior. They give great classes for anyone who'd like to adopt an animal. He has literally taken stray dogs off the street, given them to the care of prisoners, and had them placed in dog shows. The best part? His budget for the entire department is now under $3 million. Now he's in trouble with the ACLU again. He painted all his buses and vehicles with a mural that has a special hotline phone number painted on it, where you can call and report suspected illegal aliens. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement wasn't doing enough in his eyes, so he had 40 deputies trained specifically for enforcing immigration laws, started up his hotline, and bought 4 new buses just for hauling folks back to the border. Although Sheriff Joe Arpaio did not (as implied above) take over the operations of the entire Maricopa County Animal Care & Control (MCACC) department, he was instrumental in the opening of the Maricopa Animal Safe Hospice (MASH), a no-kill animal shelter operated by the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) in what was formerly Phoenix's First Avenue Jail. The MASH is a facility dedicated to caring for rescued animals that have been abused or neglected (as well as temporarily caring for the pets of owners who have checked into domestic violence shelters): Sheriff Joe Arpaio's no-kill animal shelter, MASH, was created to house and care for animals that have been abused or neglected by their caretakers and rescued by the Animal Cruelty Investigative Unit. The purpose of the shelter is to provide a safe, healthy and healing shelter for these tragic animals, who must necessarily await the outcome of their owners' cruelty cases in court. Hopefully, their ultimate outcome will be adoption into loving, permanent homes. The first shelter opened by Sheriff Arpaio is in the First Avenue Jail, located at First Avenue and Madison Street, Phoenix, Arizona. This 30-year-old jail previously held inmates, but was closed for repairs to plumbing in December 1999. Though no longer suitable for housing inmates, the jail looks like paradise to the four-footed victims now housed and recovering there. The MASH location in the First Avenue Jail is air-conditioned, and the cells have been reconditioned to comfortably house animals. In July 2007 Sheriff Arpaio launched a hot line for calling in tips and information about people living and working in Maricopa County illegally. Then in September 2007 he unveiled "moving billboards" in the form of four trucks and eight inmate passenger vans plastered with the hot line number and signs reading "Do Not Illegally Enter" and "Help Sheriff Joe Arpaio Fight Illegal Immigration and Trafficking." Critics contend that this move constitutes racial profiling; Sheriff Arpaio maintains that his signs say nothing about ethnic backgrounds: "It says illegal immigration and trafficking. I don't care where they're from." Sheriff Arpaio finally stepped down after losing a re-election bid to Democrat Paul Penzone in 2016.

SOLUTION: An Arizona sheriff dismissed prisoners' bellyaching about the heat by pointing out that soldiers serving in Iraq cope with similar conditions.

PROBLEM: The American, Walter James Palmer, a Minnesota dentist who paid $50,000 to kill the lion, has left Zimbabwe. He says he did kill the animal but believed the hunt was legal and that the necessary permits had been issued. Local hunter Theo Bronkhorst appeared in a courthouse in Hwange, 800 km (500 miles) west of Harare, and was charged with "failing to supervise, control and take reasonable steps to prevent an unlawful hunt". He pleaded not guilty to the charge and was set free after posting $1,000 bail and depositing his passport with the court. He will return to court on Aug. 5 for trial. Game park owner Honest Ndlovu, who is also accused of assisting Palmer, was not charged on Wednesday and parks officials said he would first testify for the state and be charged later. While Bronkhorst appeared in court in Zimbabwe, Palmer, who is accused of killing Cecil with a bow and arrow, was being pilloried on the Internet, with many people wishing him dead. "This is disgusting. I hope you get thrown in a cage with hungry lions," Julie Lu wrote on the Facebook page of his dental practice. Palmer said on Tuesday he had hired professional guides who secured hunting permits and deeply regretted taking the lion. He added that he had not been contacted by authorities in Zimbabwe or the United States and would assist in any inquiries. The Zimbabwe police and government have not commented. If found guilty, Bronkhorst could be fined $20,000 and possibly jailed for up to 10 years. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service expressed its concern about the killing. "We are currently gathering facts about the issue and will assist Zimbabwe officials in whatever manner requested," said Vanessa Kauffman, a spokeswoman for the government agency. "It is up to all of us - not just the people of Africa - to ensure that healthy, wild populations of animals continue to roam the savanna for generations to come." Cecil was fitted with a GPS collar for a research project by scientists from Oxford University and was one of the oldest and most famous lions in Zimbabwe. The British university's Wildlife Conservation Research Unit said it had been tracking Cecil since 2008 and was "deeply saddened" by his death. "Insofar as this happened illegally we consider it deeply reprehensible," it said in a statement. It was working closely with Zimbabwe's National Parks authorities to support their "meticulous work" in prosecuting the case. The unit also said Cecil's death would be likely to trigger a power struggle in the pride, resulting in the death of other male lions as well as Cecil's offspring. "When a male lion is killed, because of the way their society works, a likely consequence is the overthrow and death of other adult male members of his weakened coalition, and the subsequent infanticide of his cubs," it said. Palmer's hunting has attracted scrutiny in the past. In 2008, he pleaded guilty to lying to a U.S. wildlife agent about a black bear he killed in Wisconsin two years before. He was accused of killing it 40 miles outside a permitted zone, hauling the carcass back into the approved area and certifying falsely that it was killed there. He was sentenced to one year probation and fined $2,938. In the Hwange case, Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force chairman Johnny Rodrigues said Cecil was lured out of the park with bait before being shot. The incident has triggered fierce debate over the commercial 'trophy' hunting of African big game. Like many countries, Zimbabwe issues annual permits that allow foreign hunters to kill wildlife such as elephant, buffalo and lion legally, arguing that the funds raised allow the government to fund conservation efforts. "Sustainable trophy hunting is part of well-managed wildlife conservation. It creates incentives for people to look after wildlife," said Adri Kitshoff, chief executive of the Professional Hunters' Association of South Africa. "It's easy to fall into the trap of emotions and not focus on facts." However, Edward Bourke, chairman of the Australia-based Saving The Lion Foundation, said Cecil's death showed the dangers of legal hunting. "There is enough global pressure to push for change. There is an opportunity to offer alternatives, including international aid for establishing safe haven environments like national parks or eco-tourism zones," he said. One of the few countries to avoid Cecil hysteria was Zimbabwe, where most people are more preoccupied with putting food on the table and finding work in an economy suffering 80 percent unemployment. To the state-run Herald newspaper, the most remarkable aspect of the case was the lion's name, which it linked to British imperialist Cecil Rhodes, after whom the former Rhodesia named. "How someone thought it such a good idea to christen a lion after the infamous plunderer and murderer who roamed dangerously across Africa can only be a matter of conjecture," it said in an editorial.

SOLUTION: Zimbabwean charged over killing of Cecil the lion.

PROBLEM: On 13 May 2016, the web site Young Conservatives published an articlereporting thatPresident Obama had decreed that all American schools must make all bathroomstransgender or face lawsuits and potentially losefederal funding: President Obama decided to yet again defy the constitutional limits placed on his powers and released a directive stating public schools must allow transgenders to use the bathroom of their choice. Well, the great state of Texas is saying no thanks and accusing the president of blackmail. Apparently Obama doesn't understand that transgender restrooms are a 10th Amendment issue, meaning it's left up to the states to decide how to handle it and the federal government has no jurisdiction in the matter at all. The ensuing media (and social media) flurries ended up obfuscating a number of details of the issue, with most versions holding that President Obama "decreed" that all schools must immediately implement such policies, lest they be dragged into court and lose funding. As usual, however, the truth was much less outrageous than the rumors. On 13 May 2016, the U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights and the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division issued a joint "Dear Colleague" letter [PDF] that included"significant guidance" to schools about civil rights protections for transgender students under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The letter detailed federal guidelines for transgender students and bathroom use and provided definitions for the terms "Gender identity," "Sex assigned at birth," "Transgender," and "Gender transition": Schools across the country strive to create and sustain inclusive, supportive, safe, and nondiscriminatory communities for all students. In recent years, we have received an increasing number of questions from parents, teachers, principals, and school superintendents about civil rights protections for transgender students. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX) and its implementing regulations prohibit sex discrimination in educational programs and activities operated by recipients of Federal financial assistance. This prohibition encompasses discrimination based on a student's gender identity, including discrimination based on a student's transgender status. This letter summarizes a school's Title IX obligations regarding transgender students and explains how the U.S. Department of Education (ED) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) evaluate a school's compliance with these obligations. ED and DOJ (the Departments) have determined that this letter is significant guidance. This guidance does not add requirements to applicable law, but provides information and examples to inform recipients about how the Departments evaluate whether covered entities are complying with their legal obligations. If you have questions or are interested in commenting on this guidance, please contact ED[.] Accompanying this letter is a separate document from ED's Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Examples of Policies and Emerging Practices for Supporting Transgender Students. The examples in that document are taken from policies that school districts, state education agencies, and high school athletics associations around the country have adopted to help ensure that transgender students enjoy a supportive and nondiscriminatory school environment. Schools are encouraged to consult that document for practical ways to meet Title IX's requirements. Schools were informed that failure to supply legally entitled students with the necessary accommodations could constitute a violation of the obligations of federally funded schools: As a condition of receiving Federal funds, a school agrees that it will not exclude, separate, deny benefits to, or otherwise treat differently on the basis of sex any person in its educational programs or activities unless expressly authorized to do so under Title IX or its implementing regulations. The Departments treat a student's gender identity as the student's sex for purposes of Title IX and its implementing regulations. This means that a school must not treat a transgender student differently from the way it treats other students of the same gender identity. The Departments' interpretation is consistent with courts' and other agencies' interpretations of Federal laws prohibiting sex discrimination. The Departments interpret Title IX to require that when a student or the student's parent or guardian, as appropriate, notifies the school administration that the student will assert a gender identity that differs from previous representations or records, the school will begin treating the student consistent with the student's gender identity. Under Title IX, there is no medical diagnosis or treatment requirement that students must meet as a prerequisite to being treated consistent with their gender identity. Because transgender students often are unable to obtain identification documents that reflect their gender identity (e.g., due to restrictions imposed by state or local law in their place of birth or residence), requiring students to produce such identification documents in order to treat them consistent with their gender identity may violate Title IX when doing so has the practical effect of limiting or denying students equal access to an educational program or activity. The letter also contained a portion aboutrestroom and locker room use. That guidance stated that under Title IX, schools were prohibited from forcing students to use facilities inconsistent with their gender identity. That directive further stated transgender students could not be "segregated" from others in restrooms and locker rooms: Restrooms and Locker Rooms. A school may provide separate facilities on the basis of sex, but must allow transgender students access to such facilities consistent with their gender identity. A school may not require transgender students to use facilities inconsistent with their gender identity or to use individual-user facilities when other students are not required to do so. A school may, however, make individual-user options available to all students who voluntarily seek additional privacy. Critics contended that school policies about bathroom access should be decided by states and local school boards, not the feds, and that the guidelines effectively create new federal regulations that may violate the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

SOLUTION:
President Obama ordered all schools to make all bathrooms transgender or face a loss of federal funding.