Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.

Claim: Sen. Rand Paul "voted no." to provide further funding for the 9/11 first responders Victims Fund.

Q1: What did Rand Paul do regarding the extension to the 911 victims fund on July 12?
A1: Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Wednesday blocked an attempt by Democrats to pass an extension of the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund.

Q2: How did Rand Paul vote when the extension to the 911 victims fund bill was represented on July 23?
A2: He voted no

Q3: What was Sen. Rand Paul's vote as regards the 9/11 victims compensation fund
A3: bill that would compensate first responders and survivors of the September 11 terrorist attacks who have since fallen ill from the toxins and chemicals they inhaled at the site has been blocked in the Senate by Rand Paul and Mike Lee.

Q4: What was his reason for voting against the bill
A4: ”It has long been my feeling that we need to address our massive debt in the country,” he said. “And therefore any new spending …  should be offset by cutting spending that’s less valuable. We need to, at the very least, have this debate.”
user
justification: The Q&As clearly show that Paul did vote no for the extension of funding so the claim is supported.

verdict: 'Supported'
assistant