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.

[Q]: A March 5 2020 r/SandersForPresident (and r/all) thread featured a title maintaining that Democratic Party presidential candidate Joe Biden "passed the bill" making student loans "ineligible for financial relief," and an attached ten-second clip featured fellow presidential Bernie Sanders making a similar statement:Joe Biden passed the bill that made student loans ineligible for financial relief. Joe Biden is the reason so many of us don't have families yet. Joe Biden is why we can't afford houses. Joe Biden is why we're working longer hours for lower wages. from SandersForPresidentThat thread had a long title: "Joe Biden passed the bill that made student loans ineligible for financial relief. Joe Biden is the reason so many of us don't have families yet. Joe Biden is why we can't afford houses. Joe Biden is why we're working longer hours for lower wages."By contrast, in the ten-second video, Sanders said:Joe Biden voted for a bankruptcy bill, on behalf of the credit card companies, and that bill has done a lot of harm to working families all over this country I voted against it.A difference in wording between the title and the clip was important the original poster stated Biden "passed the bill," while Sanders stated that Biden had "voted for a bankruptcy bill." Here, we are examining whether Biden voted for a bankruptcy bill with the described features, as Biden himself was not empowered to "pass" a bill presumably the submitter was echoing Sanders' claims in the clip.The snippet originated from a longer interview with Sanders conducted by MSNBC's Rachel Maddow on March 4 2020. Although MSNBC curated short clips from the interview, none was specifically labeled as having to do with Sanders' claim about Biden and the bankruptcy bill. (We were unable to find a transcript. )In the clip we transcribed above, Sanders didn't mention a specific bill. However, it wasn't difficult to narrow down specific legislation due to the prominence of student debt as an issue in the 2020 primary.In December 2019,The Guardianpublishedan article with a headline ("How Biden helped create the student debt problem he now promises to fix") making claims similar to those made by Sanders in the brief video shared to Reddit. With a subheading claiming that the "former vice-president and 2020 presidential hopeful backed a 2005 bill that stripped students of bankruptcy protections and left millions in financial stress," it reported in part:In [February 2020] Joe Biden will lay "Joe's vision for America" at the feet of Iowa's caucus-goers in the hope that the first voters in the Democratic presidential race will put him on the road to the White House.Among his promises is that he will fix the student loan crisis saddling 45 million Americans with crippling debt now totalling a staggering $1.5tn [Biden's] pledge is one of the most striking policies on offer from Democratic candidates in the 2020 race, given how the problem Biden now proposes to resolve came about in the first place. Private student loans were largely stripped of bankruptcy protections in 2005 in a congressional move that had the devastating impact of tripling such debt over a decade and locking in millions of Americans to years of grueling repayments.The Republican-led bill tightened the bankruptcy code, unleashing a huge giveaway to lenders at the expense of indebted student borrowers. At the time it faced vociferous opposition from 25 Democrats in the US Senate.But it passed anyway, with 18 Democratic senators breaking ranks and casting their vote in favor of the bill. Of those 18, one politician stood out as an especially enthusiastic champion of the credit companies who, as it happens, had given him hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions Joe Biden.The Guardian quotedUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill law professorMelissa Jacoby on Biden's role in the bill's passage:Biden was one of the most powerful people who could have said no, who could have changed this. Instead he used his leadership role to limit the ability of other Democrats who had concerns and who wanted the bill softened[. ]In January 2020, TheIntercept.com covered the origins and progression of student loan debt in the United States, up to and including its prevalence in Democratic primary debates and platforms. as a senator from Delaware, Biden was one of the most enthusiastic supporters of the disastrous 2005 bankruptcy bill that made it nearly impossible for borrowers to reduce their student loan debt. The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act raised the bar for families to pursue Chapter 7 bankruptcy protections. It overwhelmingly passed in the Senate at the end of the Clinton administration, over the objections of [Elizabeth] Warren, then a bankruptcy expert who had tangled for years with Biden over the issue. She lobbied first lady Hillary Clinton, who herself persuaded Bill Clinton to veto it.Biden came back to the legislation under the Bush administration; it passed the Senate in 2005 on a 74-25 vote, with most Democratic lawmakers, including then-Sen. Barack Obama, voting against it. ([Hillary] Clinton, by then a senator from New York, voted for it.) George W. Bush signed it into law, and private student loan debt skyrocketed in the wake of its passage. The total amount of private student loan debt more than doubled between 2005 and 2011, growing from $55.9 billion to $140.2 billion, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.In February 2020, RealClearPolitics examined Biden's 2020 campaign stance on student debt, and contrasted it with his support in the early 2000s for more restrictions on student borrowers:Biden's student-loan plan represents a radical departure from positions he held during bankruptcy-law negotiations in the early 2000s. Then a senator from Delaware, he forcefully backed measures that made it much harder for private student-loan borrowers filing for bankruptcy to shed that debt. Representing many of the big financial institutions based in his home state, Biden was such a reliable advocate for the financial services industry that he was often referred to as "the senator from MBNA," the credit-card company that regularly doled out contributions to his campaigns.In promoting a 2005 bankruptcy reform measure, Biden argued that too many people were skipping out of their debts too easily and sticking other borrowers with the bill while interest rates rose as a resultA bankruptcy court judge also testifying [the same day as Biden] took issue with Biden's stance, arguing that government-backed student loans aren't dischargeable something that has remained the case since then, as well."You would never be able to [discharge government-backed student loans like] that," Judge Randall Newsome said."Like heck you can't," Biden countered. "You are full of malarkey, judge."Newsome was just one of the many opponents of the bill whom Biden sparred with at the time. Elizabeth Warren, then a Harvard law professor, opposed the bankruptcy bill so aggressively that she says it inspired her to run for the Senate."I got in that fight because [families] just didn't have anyone, and Joe Biden was on the side of the credit card companies," Warren said at an April rally in Iowa. "It's all a matter of public record."As Newsome noted, discharging government-backed student loans is, and has always been, nearly impossible. However, the 2005 bill was described as involving private student loan debt, not debt held by the federal government.In January 2020, theAmerican Prospect reportedthat Biden had voted several times against "softening" the effects of that bill (abbreviated as BAPCPA) on myriad demographics hardest hit by its provisions:Biden also consistently voted against efforts to soften BAPCPA's blow on vulnerable populations. He voted against three amendments to ease bankruptcy requirements for consumers whose financial troubles stem from medical expenses. He voted against an amendment that would have helped seniors keep their homes. He voted against exempting servicemembers and widows of servicemembers killed in action from the law's eligibility restrictions. He voted against an amendment to exempt women whose financial troubles stemmed from deadbeat husbands' failure to pay child support or alimony. And Biden even voted against an amendment that would have ensured that children of debtors could still be given birthday and Christmas presents. Biden also voted against allowing debtors to pay their union dues during bankruptcy, potentially imperiling their employment and ability to achieve financial rehabilitation.In excerpts above, the bill Biden was often accused of supporting was referenced by its name the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. Text of the bill was available on Congress.gov, and Section 220 of the bill declaredboth private and federal student debt exempt from being discharged in bankruptcy. A summary of all of the bill's points can be viewed here.In the clip, Sanders made two claims about voting on the bill, stating that Biden voted for it, and that he Sanders had voted against it. According to Senate.gov, Biden voted in favor of the bill in the Senate on March 10 2005. Per GovTrack.us, Sanders (then in the House of Representatives) did vote against the same bill on April 14 2005.On Reddit, a post to r/SandersForPresident misstated Sanders' statement on the 2005 bankruptcy bill making it virtually impossible to discharge private student debt. Sanders said that Biden "voted for a bankruptcy bill, on behalf of the credit card companies, and that bill has done a lot of harm to working families all over this country I voted against it." Sanders was correct Biden was among the few Democrats voting in favor of that 2005 bill in the Senate, and when it came around to the House the following month, Sanders voted against it.
[A]: Joe Biden voted for a bill which made it difficult or impossible to discharge student loans during bankruptcy; Bernie Sanders voted against it.

[Q]: Trans people have often been denied treatment in Pakistan because doctors could not decide whether to treat them in a male or female ward, and have even died for lack of care. The government plans to set up separate wards in hospitals around the country for transgender patients, according to Dr. Zafar Mirza, a special aide to Prime Minister Imran Khan for health services. Pakistan a conservative, majority Muslim nation officially recognized transgender as a third gender in 2012. Yet transgender people are still largely confined to the margins of society, often taunted in public, ostracized by family and targeted in violent attacks. Most transgender people in Pakistan are forced to survive by begging, dancing or prostitution. Sex reassignment surgery requires a court order, family approval, a psychiatrist's note and a medical recommendation. The Supreme Court ordered the government to list transgender as a third gender on ID cards, and the national agency responsible for issuing them will also handle the new health cards. The health ministry will immediately start giving health cards to all transgender people who are registered, said Dr. Mirza. He said anyone who wants to change the listing on their ID to transgender will have a "one-time option" to do so. He didn't specify how long that period would last. Speaking to reporters in the capital of Islamabad, he stressed that the government is legally responsible for ensuring all citizens' rights, including access to healthcare nationwide. Transgender people face greater peril in more conservative areas of Pakistan, where Islamic extremists associate them with homosexuality and prostitution. But there are also signs of progress. In 2018, Marvia Malik made history by becoming Pakistan's first transgender newscaster at just 21 years old. ____ Khan reported from Karachi, Pakistan
[A]: Pakistan issues health IDs for trans people to improve care.

[Q]: Dr. Brad Black runs the nonprofit Center for Asbestos Related Disease (CARD) and perhaps more than anyone he sees a clear picture of Libby's plague but it's a picture that muddies the further one strays from the former mining town, and away from its medical professionals who have been charting an alarming rate of asbestos-related lung disease here for nearly two decades. A doctor in Libby since 1977, Black has been at the front lines of Libby's asbestos fight, and despite all the fuss that's been made over Libby in the last 20 years despite the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 2009 declaration of a public health emergency, the first such designation since the federal Superfund law passed in 1980; despite the more than $575 million spent in cleanup costs; and despite the well-documented asbestos contamination that's sickened thousands and killed hundreds Black is still waging an uphill battle. "We keep on plugging because that's all we can do," Black said recently in a basement conference room at the CARD clinic. "When you have new patients coming through the door on a regular basis, your primary objective is to provide them with care. And that's what we're trying to do." Still, there's more to Black's work than traditional patient care, particularly as he and his colleagues pioneer new and innovative research in an effort to better understand Libby's rarefied breed of toxic fibers. He and the CARD staff are also striving to educate the broader medical community about how they're diagnosing asbestos-related health problems, and why they're interpreting the faint hues of gray and white that appear on thousands of patients' X-ray and CT images as disease when other pulmonologist colleagues don't see it. Lung disease caused from Libby Amphibole asbestos is difficult to detect because it develops subtly and forms a thin layer along the interior chest wall, where it may blend in with shadows, Black said. The scarring of the lungs is progressive in Libby patients exposed to asbestos fibers, so being able to see the scarring and gauge its growth early on through scans is critical for care, he said. "We've tried very hard to get people to see what we're seeing," Black said. "Radiology is a gray world. You're looking at gray shadows and everyone sees it differently. If you don't know the disease, if you don't know what you're looking for, if you haven't been tracking it here for 18 years, you won't understand. You've got to know what you're looking for." Unfortunately, what Black's looking for is precisely what he's finding. New patients still arrive with metronomic regularity at the CARD clinic, a small medical clinic located off Mineral Avenue. Last year alone, 837 patients were screened and 209 were diagnosed, according to Tracy McNew, CARD's administrative director. McNew says that's a figure that falls right in line with the clinic's annual diagnostic rate of about 25 percent, which, when taking into account its nearly 20-year existence, portrays a bleak picture. "Even after all this time, we're still receiving new patients all the time," she said. Two decades ago, the scope of asbestos exposure in Libby came to light when news reports detailed a link between the deadly fibers unearthed at a vermiculite mine operated by W.R. Grace and Co. between 1963 and 1990 and the hundreds of people who were sick and dying because of exposure to asbestos-laden dust. Two of the diseases most commonly associated with asbestos asbestosis and mesothelioma have latency periods of up to 40 years. That means people who were exposed to the asbestos dust could continue to develop illnesses for generations to come. "Conservative estimates put us out until 2030, so it won't go away for a while," Black said. "Again, those are conservative estimates. It's really hard to predict how many sick people we're going to see, but it's going to be a lot." Still, even as the volume of patients at the CARD clinic continues to swell, there's a relative dearth of science. That's because despite the millions spent by the federal government, no real investment has been made in scientific studies that would help answer some basic questions, such as: Does an effective treatment exist? Are there markers, like blood proteins, to help identify asbestos-related disease in patients before the air-constricting symptoms arrive? To what degree do genetics play a role in determining who gets sick? Do autoimmune diseases like rheumatoid arthritis and lupus serve as a precursor to asbestos-related disease and lung cancer? And why does Libby's particular brand of asbestos, a toxic cocktail of several naturally occurring mineral fibers, cause such devastating disease to people with short-term exposure? "There's a real misunderstanding that there has to be a long-term occupational exposure," Black said. "Even low levels can lead to very serious lung disease. We have people in our population who had very brief exposures and 10 years later they have the disease. The level that it takes to cause significant disease is really hard to believe. But that's Libby's pattern." Libby's pattern is unlike that seen in most commercial asbestos, which belongs to a family called chrysotile asbestos, tiny fibers that, when inhaled, spiral into lung tissue like corkscrews. But Libby's asbestos hails from the amphibole family, dart-shaped fibers that, when inhaled, lodge in the outer lining of the lung, or the pleura, a thin, elastic sac that, when healthy, expands and contracts in time with a person's breathing. But when the pleura is riddled with rigid, dart-shaped asbestos fibers, it begins to scar over, rendering the soft, pink tissue that was once thin as plastic wrap into something that's thick as an orange peel. Disease that's the result of Libby's asbestos can also be tricky to diagnose because it remains latent for years, then progresses at rates that have stunned medical professionals. Black and his colleagues might read abnormalities on a patient's X-ray or CT images years before the patient ever exhibits symptoms. Many patients at the CARD clinic request screenings simply because they've lived in Libby and may have been inadvertently exposed to the dust. Because of a provision former U.S. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Montana, inserted into the Obama administration's health care reform bill, the Affordable Care Act, victims of asbestos-related disease in Libby are eligible for a range of federal health care benefits, including services not normally covered by Medicare. The provision provides funding for screenings as well as Medicare coverage for all Libby residents with asbestos-related disease. Under a special Medicare pilot program, the government also pays for services not included under Medicare, such as home care, medical equipment, counseling, help with travel, and medications not covered by Medicare prescription plans. It's a boon to current and former Libby residents unsure whether they've been exposed. Studies by the EPA explain how the old vermiculite mine on Zonolite Mountain dispersed about 5,000 pounds of amphibole asbestos fibers over Libby every day the mill operated. It was sprinkled on the local ball field, used on the high school track, piled in heaps around the community, trucked away by train, and used as insulation in millions of homes across the country. "In Libby, there are all kinds of pathways to exposure. It's not just miners. People played in piles of the stuff when they were kids," Black said. "A lot of the time we'll screen hunters who grew up here and suddenly notice they can't hike uphill any more without stopping every 15 feet to catch their breath." The findings in Libby could have larger implications for helping doctors across the country better diagnose people who were exposed to the amphibole fibers and moved away or were exposed to the fibers through one of the many products made with asbestos from the Northwest Montana mine. Doctors might not recognize the more progressive form of lung disease caused by amphibole fibers, instead believing patients were exposed to chrysotile fibers, which make up 95 percent of asbestos use, Black said. Still, Black is sympathetic to his colleagues who don't see what he sees on patients' scans. "It's been a challenge since we started," he said. "Prior to 2000, we didn't know anything. It was all a new experience for me because what we were seeing was so different than what we were trained to look for. We didn't know what we were looking for." "This isn't your grandfather's asbestos disease," he added. In 2017, Black and his colleagues published a groundbreaking study that validated their interpretation of abnormalities they detected in imagery and scans that other radiologists dismissed. The case involved a 74-year-old former Libby resident who worked as a millwright at the vermiculite mine from 1969 until its closure in 1990. He moved out of the area in 1991, and had no other known exposure to asbestos fibers. In 2011, he developed increasing chest pain, and in 2013 lung cancer screening detected a new, solid nodule that continued to grow on follow-up scans. When the patient was referred for a lobectomy, a procedure that involves removing a section of the lung, analysis of the tissue revealed physical proof of what Black and his colleagues had detected on the patient's scans it was riddled with asbestos fibers, specifically, 5.5 million fibers per gram of wet lung lining. "Most people would never have interpreted this patient's scans as positive," Black said. "And here we had physical proof, not just a radiologist's interpretation. It was an ideal case because it showed exactly what we have been seeing a high fiber burden that would not have been recognized as abnormal by most radiologists. Here, we were able to show it and compare it to the finer features of the scan." It was the first case in which lung tissue from a Libby miner was evaluated for fiber analysis. "We know what we're looking for but to train other people to see it over time is a challenge," he said. Even as Black and his colleagues, like Dr. Albert Miller, who specializes in pulmonary medicine and performs work at the Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York, seek to mount more scientific evidence to better understand Libby's asbestos disease, and better imagery to diagnose it, thousands of lawsuits plod on through the legal channels. Although W.R. Grace is no longer a defendant in legal actions, other defendants remain embroiled in lawsuits: International Paper, which owns the firm that operated a lumber mill in Libby; Grace's insurance carrier, Maryland Casualty; Burlington Northern Santa Fe, which trucked the asbestos-laced ore to communities across the country; and the state of Montana, which knew about the mine contaminants for decades. Black says the paper warfare waged in the lawsuits is time-consuming, and something he'd "rather do without." The Montana Supreme Court recently appointed six additional Asbestos Claim Court judges to handle the thousands of claims pending against dozens of defendants, a bloated docket that until the high court's decision last month fell on a single jurist's desktop. The Asbestos Claims Court was created in November 2017, with the Honorable Amy Eddy, 11th Judicial District in Kalispell, appointed as the judge for pretrial proceedings for the 545 plaintiffs identified at that time, all of them fighting for reparations stemming from asbestos exposure from a now-defunct vermiculite mine in Libby, owned and operated by W.R. Grace, which derailed the cases for years after the company filed for federal bankruptcy. With the federal proceedings over, the clot of cases is coursing through a constricted legal artery, even as the docket continues to swell. Eddy said an additional six judges is barely scratching the surface of what's needed to efficiently handle the volume, and they're performing the work without compensation, on a voluntary basis. "A total of seven judges just isn't enough with so many hundreds of complex cases based primarily in Northwest Montana," she said. Now, similar lawsuits are being filed against Johnson & Johnson following reports that some of the company's talc used in its baby products contained asbestos fibers, including tremolite fibers that have been the culprit in Libby. So if the fundamental science still has yet to be performed in Libby, ground-zero in the nation for asbestos-related disease, what are the implications for new discoveries of asbestos exposure in other corners of industry, which will spawn thousands more lawsuits? "We could have more science and it would still be a battle. It's the nature of the game," Black said. "But more science is exactly what we need." With a limited budget, and in some cases no budget whatsoever to perform the necessary studies, Black says the scientific community is missing out on a monumental opportunity. "We have the perfect population to perform these studies on, but to find the money? Nobody has it," Black said. "In the world of asbestos, it's tough to get a fair shake." "To lose this opportunity with the Libby population is one of the biggest mistakes we can make," he added.
[A]:
20 years later, Libby's asbestos fight goes on.