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.

Q: Paragraph: In 1976, U.S. President Gerald Ford signed off on the National Emergencies Act (NEA), federal legislation that ended all previous national states of emergency and formalized the process by which the President can declare states of emergencies and undertake special powers during those emergencies. In general, the President may initiate a state of emergency by issuing a declaration (typically via executive order). An existing state of emergency can be terminated by the President himself, or by a joint resolution by Congress. The President can veto such a resolution, however, requiring both houses of Congress to then override the veto by a two-thirds vote. When President Donald Trump hinted in early 2019 his intention to bypass Congress and secure funding for building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border by declaring a national emergency — and then followed through on that plan — the subject of “national emergencies” suddenly became a hot topic of public discussion. Since the public tends to associate that term with dire threats such as terrorist attacks, epidemics, or the outbreak of war, many people were surprised to learn that several dozen national emergencies had been declared since the passage of the NEA in 1976 — as reflected in a viral social media post:  According to the Brennan Center for Justice, at the time of President Trump’s declaration of a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States in February 2019, some 58 national emergencies had previously been declared by various presidents since 1979, with 31 of them still in effect as of February 2019. The gist of the social media post displayed above is therefore correct, in that every U.S. president since 1976 (excluding Gerald Ford, whose term ended in January 1977) has declared at least one national emergency, although we came up with some slightly different numbers. (Our tally based on the Brennan Center’s list has Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush each declaring one more emergency than stated above, and President Barack Obama declaring one fewer than stated.) In addition, the majority of those emergency declarations remain in effect as of this writing. The focus of these national emergencies has ranged from President Carter’s blocking Iranian government property after fifty-two American diplomats and citizens were taken hostage in Tehran in 1979 and President Reagan’s barring trade with Nicaragua in 1985, to President Clinton’s prohibiting transactions with terrorists who threatened to disrupt the Middle East peace process in 1995 and President Obama’s declaring an emergency over the H1N1 influenza pandemic of 2009. Claim: Every U.S. president since 1976 has declared at least one national emergency.

A: In short, although many Americans may not have been aware of it at the beginning of 2019, the United States has been under one or more states of national emergency continuously for the last four decades.
****
Q: Paragraph: The tentative settlement, which needs a judge’s approval, will provide compensation ranging from $2,500 up to $250,000 to women who say Dr. George Tyndall abused them between 1988 and 2016, USC Interim President Wanda Austin said in a statement . About 500 current and former students have now made accusations against Tyndall and filed various lawsuits. They contend he routinely made crude comments, took inappropriate photos, forced them to strip naked and groped them under the guise of medical treatment. Tyndall spent about three decades as a USC staff gynecologist before retiring last year after a university investigation concluded there was evidence that he sexually harassed students during exams. Tyndall has denied the allegations and has not been charged with a crime. Los Angeles police and Los Angeles County prosecutors are reviewing the claims. His attorney, Leonard Levine, said in a statement that Tyndall “continues to focus on the criminal investigation” and had no further comment. The proposed settlement applies to a pending federal class-action lawsuit that involves a fraction of the overall accusers but is open to every woman who ever had an appointment with the gynecologist. Three attorneys representing nearly 300 accusers say they’re strongly advising their clients against joining the federal action so they can fight in state court. “The only guaranteed number in this case is $2,500 — $2,500 won’t even get you a 50-yard-line seat at a USC football game, let alone compensate somebody for being sexually assaulted by their doctor when they were 18 or 17,” said John Manly, an attorney who represents 180 accusers. Attorney Gloria Allred, who represents 36 women who have accused Tyndall, said in a statement that the amount of money under the proposed settlement is “way too minimal” for what some of the women endured. Manly also criticized the proposed settlement as failing to hold USC accountable and called it an effort to cap future monetary damages. “We still don’t know when did USC first know, how often were they warned, what administrators were involved, was there criminal conduct?” Manly said. “Our clients, more than anything, want those answers and people held accountable, not because it helps their case but to protect the future women at USC.” Tara Lee, an attorney who represents USC, said questions regarding potential criminal conduct are being investigated “and those answers will be available when the investigation itself is completed.” “The settlement process they’re criticizing would not provide for that,” she said. “The settlement process would be very victim-focused to address their needs and make sure they have their claims identified and awarded.” Under the proposal, any woman who had an appointment with Tyndall will get $2,500. Those who submit written claims detailing their allegations and the impact on their lives would be eligible for between $7,500 and $20,000. Women who agree to further detail their allegations in a private interview with a psychologist could see damages of up to $250,000. Lee said the school tried to create a system that would allow women to decide how much to engage in the process. Attorney Mike Arias, who represents 80 accusers, criticized the speed of the proposed settlement, saying he and other attorneys were expecting USC to disclose more information. “USC may quell the depth of the anger and upset by getting hundreds of other victims to join the settlement, but it’s not going to be over,” Arias said, adding that he and other attorneys will fight the settlement’s approval. The university was first criticized in the case after the Los Angeles Times reported earlier this year that complaints about Tyndall’s care went unheeded for decades and that USC failed to report him to the medical board even after quietly forcing him to retire. Two administrators were fired, and President C.L. Max Nikias stepped down following the criticism. USC has denied accusations of a cover-up. Austin said that since she became interim university president, “a fair and respectful resolution for as many former patients as possible has been a priority for the university and for me personally.” “Many sweeping changes have been made and we continue to work every day to prevent all forms of misconduct on our campuses,” her statement said. On Thursday, 93 women who say Tyndall abused or harassed them announced the latest lawsuit against USC, saying it ignored decades of complaints. Dana Loewy said Tyndall assaulted her during an exam in 1993. “I am part of an accidental sisterhood of hundreds of women because the university we love betrayed our trust,” she said. ___ Associated Press writers John Antczak and Brian Melley in Los Angeles contributed to this report. Claim: USC agrees to pay $215M to settle doctor sex abuse claims.

A: The University of Southern California said Friday that it would pay $215 million to settle claims of sexual abuse and harassment by a school gynecologist, but lawyers for hundreds of the accusers say it’s not enough money and the university has yet to fully disclose what it knew about the doctor’s behavior.
****
Q: Paragraph: The company said the trial will continue unchanged as per the recommendation of a data monitoring committee. The trial was testing Bristol-Myers’ drugs Opdivo and Yervoy, against Opdivo alone, in patients with advanced melanoma. The combination failed to show a statistically significant benefit in patients whose tumors had 1% or lower levels of the PD-L1 protein being targeted, the company said. The American Cancer Society estimates that about 96,480 melanoma cases will be diagnosed in the United States this year. Bristol-Myers shares were trading at $55.99 before the bell. Claim: Bristol-Myers misses main goal of late-stage skin cancer trial.

A:
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co said on Wednesday a late-stage trial testing a combination of its cancer drugs missed a main goal of preventing skin cancer from recurring in a certain group of patients, sending its shares down nearly 1%.
****
