Search results for: “Key Construction”

  • Kansas and Wichita quick takes: Monday March 21, 2011

    Wichita City Council this week. As it is the fourth Tuesday of the month, the Wichita City Council handles consent agenda items only and often has a workshop. Consent agenda items are thought by the agenda-builder to be non-controversial, and are voted on by the council as a group, unless a council member requests to pull an item for individual discussion and voting. … This week’s meeting will also feature the awarding of a key to the city to Kansas Governor Sam Brownback. Perhaps the governor will take a moment to comment on his economic development plan, which discourages the type of targeted incentives that Wichita relies on. … The agenda packet is at 03-22-2011 Council Agenda Packet.

    Government the problem. Rasmussen: “Ronald Reagan famously declared in his first inaugural address in January 1981 that ‘government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.’ Forty-six percent (46%) of Likely U.S. Voters tell us in a new national telephone survey that that policy position is held mostly by conservatives and 40% say Reagan’s view is shared by most Americans.” The poll finds “Just 19% of the Political Class believe Reagan’s view is shared by most Americans.” The political class is the minority of voters who believe in big government. Rasmussen says they “tend to trust political leaders more than the public at large and are far less skeptical about government.” The Wall Street Journal has more on this at Populism and the Political Class.

    Budget worse than thought. “The Congressional Budget Office on Friday released its analysis of President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal and found it does less to rein in deficits and the debt than the administration had estimated.” A large share of the blame is placed on the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts. See CBO: Obama budget worse than projected on 10-year deficit.

    Detroit turns schools over to charters. From Education Week: “The financially embattled Detroit school system has announced a controversial plan to turn nearly a third of the district’s 141 schools over to charter operators or education-management organizations by next school year. Officials say their only other option is to close dozens of low-performing schools. If the plan to hand 41 schools over to outside managers is approved by the school board, the 73,000-student Detroit district will be borrowing a page from the same playbook that a growing number of large urban districts seem to be using.” … The article notes that Philadelphia turned over seven schools to charter operators, and Los Angeles will turn over seven next year. Charter schools are funded by public money but operate largely outside the existing public school system. They usually have wide latitude in setting policies, and generally the teachers union is not involved. Not everyone thinks the plan will work, with one critic writing “Chartering schools is not a silver bullet that can solve the long-standing governance, financial, and academic issues that districts like Detroit face.” … Kansas has few charter schools as Kansas law is designed to ensure that few charters will be granted.

    The State and the Intellectuals. Murray N. Rothbard asks the question “Why do people obey the edicts and depredations of the ruling elite?” and provides the answer. From For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto: The answer is that, since the early origins of the State, its rulers have always turned, as a necessary bolster to their rule, to an alliance with society’s class of intellectuals. The masses do not create their own abstract ideas, or indeed think through these ideas independently; they follow passively the ideas adopted and promulgated by the body of intellectuals, who become the effective “opinion moulders” in society. And since it is precisely a moulding of opinion on behalf of the rulers that the State almost desperately needs, this forms a firm basis for the age-old alliance of the intellectuals and the ruling classes of the State. The alliance is based on a quid pro quo: on the one hand, the intellectuals spread among the masses the idea that the State and its rulers are wise, good, sometimes divine, and at the very least inevitable and better than any conceivable alternatives. In return for this panoply of ideology, the State incorporates the intellectuals as part of the ruling elite, granting them power, status, prestige, and material security. Furthermore, intellectuals are needed to staff the bureaucracy and to “plan” the economy and society. … In the modern era, when theocratic arguments have lost much of their lustre among the public, the intellectuals have posed as the scientific cadre of “experts” and have been busy informing the hapless public that political affairs, foreign and domestic, are much too complex for the average person to bother his head about. Only the State and its corps of intellectual experts, planners, scientists, economists, and “national security managers” can possibly hope to deal with these problems. The role of the masses, even in “democracies,” is to ratify and assent to the decisions of their knowledgeable rulers.

    Global warming panic explained. A liberal tries to explain why she thinks the world will end, and what should be done about it. From Battlefield315.

  • No one is stealing* from KPERS

    No one is stealing* from KPERS

    No one is stealing from KPERS, the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System. But there are related problems.

    You don’t have to look for long on Facebook before you’ll find comments like these regarding KPERS, the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System:

    “This is BS. Stupid Brownback robbed our pension plan; we have no real confidence that it will ever be paid back. Why don’t we have some kind of safety measure in place to prevent governors like him from stealing from us?”

    “If the governor would keep his greedy hands off of the KPERS money that is there, we might not be having this problem. It was not set up as a lending bank when the Governor’s policies proved to be unworkable. Leave my money alone!!!!!”

    These comments — and many similar posted all over Facebook — accuse Kansas state government, specifically the current governor, of stealing from KPERS. But that is not happening, according to Alan Conroy, KPERS Executive Director. By email, he answered this question posed by Kansas Policy Institute: “Can you please confirm that the Legislature or the Governor cannot and have not borrowed money from funds deposited with KPERS?

    Conroy’s response, in part, was “Once funds are placed in the KPERS Trust Fund they cannot be withdrawn or ‘loaned-out’ to another entity or group. The only way funds come out of the Trust Fund is to pay the promised benefits to the members.”

    That ought to settle the question of whether money is being “robbed” or “stolen” from KPERS.

    But you’ll notice that the title of this article contains an asterisk. That’s because KPERS does have many problems. The most important is its underfunded status, which is a chronic problem. This is because the state has not made the actuarially required contributions. This is “stealing,” in a roundabout way. Who is suffering the loss? Not future KPERS retirees, as it is almost certain they will receive their promised benefits. Instead, it is future Kansas taxpayers who will have to make extra contributions to KPERS to make up for the current and past legislatures not making sufficient contributions.

    This is one of the reasons why government should not offer defined-benefit pension plans. Because of the long time horizons involved, it’s easy to delay and postpone a solution to the future. Or, legislators are prone to make risky investment decisions as Kansas did in 2015. The state’s action simply replaced KPERS debt with debt the general fund is responsible for. This, of course, is the state selling $1 billion in bonds and transferring the proceeds to KPERS. It makes the KPERS unfunded ratio look better, as the governor and Republican legislative leaders continually boast. But it’s a risky maneuver, and it has led to undesirable behavior that was entirely predictable.

    The plan was that the state would borrow $1 billion, and invest it. If the state earned more in investment returns than in interest cost on the bonds, the state wins. Barry Poulson, Ph.D., Emeritus Professor at the University of Colorado — Boulder has written on the danger of borrowing to shore up state pension funds, as Kansas has done. He explained there is the “lack of nexus between the investment of the bond proceeds and payments for unfunded liabilities in the plan.” This means that the borrowed funds may be used for current spending rather than for correcting the KPERS unfunded liability.1 What Poulson warned of happened in Kansas.

    There’s another way that KPERS is stealing from future taxpayers. When performing projections, a key variable is the discount rate, which is to say, the rate that KPERS expects to achieve on its investments, over the long term. Small changes in the discount rate have large impacts. The nearby illustration from the KPERS annual report for 2015 shows that using a discount rate of 8.00 percent, the KPERS unfunded liability is slightly less than $9 billion. Change the discount rate to 7.00 percent, and the unfunded liability rises to almost $12 billion.

    Some authorities believe that state pension funds should use a realistic discount rate, maybe four percent or so. That would cause the unfunded liability to explode. To its credit, KPERS recently adopted a discount rate of 7.75 percent, but that adjustment is not nearly enough.

    Who will have to pay to make up the deficiencies caused by using an unrealistic discount rate? Future Kansas taxpayers, not KPERS retirees.

    There was a time when money was really and truly stolen from KPERS, in a way. Under the leadership of former Kansas Governor John Carlin, it was decided that KPERS would make targeted, or direct, investments in Kansas companies. A scandal erupted, and KPERS lost many millions.2

    Another source described the aftermath as this: “In total KPERS faced losses of at least $138 million from its direct investment program. Moreover more than seven hundred Kansas residents lost their jobs as a result of these failures — a striking contradiction to the stimulus purpose of the Kansas investment program. In hindsight the lack of professional oversight by KPERS of its private investments program was blamed for the failure of the direct investment program.”3 The chair of the KPERS Board of Trustees pleaded no contest to one felony count of aiding and abetting securities fraud regarding a KPERS investment.4

    This sounds like stealing from KPERS. Despite this happening at the urging of Carlin, he now portrays himself as a leader, a senior statesman to whom we should listen.


    Notes

    1. Weeks, Bob. This is why we must eliminate defined-benefit public pensions. https://wichitaliberty.org/kansas-government/we-must-eliminate-defined-benefit-public-pensions/.
    2. “It started as a way to use the state pension fund to boost the Kansas economy, making loans or investing in healthy businesses. But it has mushroomed into the biggest scandal in state history. Although the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System remains financially sound, with a value of about $4.4 billion, known losses exceed $230 million. Experts say total losses could double or triple.” Curran, Tim. Toto, we’re not in Kansas anymore: state pension scandal a nightmare. Associated Press. Oct. 7, 1991. http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1991/Toto-We-re-Not-in-Kansas-Anymore-State-Pension-Scandal-A-Nightmare/id-fe758e81f6b6a821076c829764cb6399.
    3. Cumming, Douglas ed. The Oxford Handbook of Private Equity. Oxford University Press.
    4. Press, A 1992, ‘Former KPERS Chief Sentenced To Probation For Securities Fraud’, Wichita Eagle, The (KS), 25 Jun, p. 4D, (online NewsBank).
  • Education gap on Wichita City Council

    Education gap on Wichita City Council

    Currently there is discussion in Wichita on whether higher education is valued by residents. Following, from April 2011, a look at the educational achievement of the Wichita City Council. The members of the council cited below were Lavonta Williams, Sue Schlapp, Jim Skelton, Paul Gray, Jeff Longwell, and Janet Miller. Carl Brewer was mayor.

    Before Jim Skelton left the council in January, none of the four men serving on the Wichita City Council had completed a college degree. The three women serving on the council set a better example, with all three holding college degrees.

    Of the candidates running in next week’s election for four council seats and the office of mayor, less than half hold college degrees.

    Is it necessary to complete college in order to serve in an office like mayor or city council? Apparently, none of the four men who held these offices without a degree thought so. The two running to retain their present positions — Mayor Carl Brewer and council member Jeff Longwell (district 5, west and northwest Wichita) — evidently don’t think so, or they would not be running again.

    But we tell young people that college holds the key to success. We encourage schoolchildren to consider college and to take a rigorous high school curriculum in order to prepare for it. We encourage families to save for college. Our region’s economic development agency promotes the number of people with college or advanced degrees. We promote our colleges and universities as a factor that distinguishes Wichita. We hope that our elected officials will set an example we want young people to follow.

    Once in office, we ask our city elected officials to attempt to grasp and understand complex sets of financial data, working with a budget of about half a billion dollars for the City of Wichita. We hope that they will be able to consider large and weighty issues such as the role of government in a free society. Members of the professional management staff — bureaucrats — that manage the city, county, and state are generally required to hold college degrees.

    The irony is that elected officials often are highly reliant on the bureaucratic staff for information, data, and advice, and this professional bureaucracy is often highly educated. Does this imbalance create problems?

    Elected officials compared to regular people

    Amazingly, it turns out that elected officials, as a group, are less knowledgeable about civics than the general population. That’s the finding of Intercollegiate Studies Institute, which surveyed Americans and their knowledge of civics in 2008. After analyzing the data, ISI concluded: “Simply put, the more you know about American government, history, and economics the less likely you are to pursue and win elective office.”

  • The ‘Twitter Files’ Took Over the Government

    (Unlocked gift link included)

    One-sentence summary:
    Elon Musk’s promotion of misleading online conspiracy theories through the so-called “Twitter Files” has now influenced real government policy under Donald Trump, leading to the dismantling of federal institutions based on viral misinformation.

    Renée DiResta’s article outlines how Elon Musk’s online conspiracy-fueled narratives, which began with the “Twitter Files,” have now expanded into a full-scale influence operation within the U.S. government under Donald Trump’s second administration. After purchasing Twitter in 2022, Musk promoted a series of misleading claims that framed content moderation and routine platform operations as deep-state censorship against conservatives. Now in charge of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)-a meme-referencing agency created by Trump-Musk has weaponized these tactics against real government institutions.

    The article details how Musk uses viral posts on X (formerly Twitter) to misrepresent public data, claiming fraud or corruption within agencies like Social Security and USAID. Examples include false accusations that Social Security payments were going to Ukraine and that USAID funded condom purchases for Hamas. These stories, though based on publicly available or misunderstood data, gain traction via Musk’s online megaphone and are amplified by influencers, sparking widespread public outrage and political action. Despite being quickly debunked, these narratives are used as justifications for policy changes, program cuts, and attacks on civil servants.

    DiResta explains how the same figures who pushed the Twitter Files are now misleadingly analyzing government spending databases, portraying mundane line items as nefarious secrets. This cycle of selective disclosure, viral misinformation, and government action has created a dangerous feedback loop that undermines institutional credibility and disrupts necessary functions. Musk’s framing of these “revelations” as scandals has turned governance into a performative spectacle, eroding the ability of agencies to function and casting reformable inefficiencies as deep conspiracies.

    Ultimately, DiResta argues that this isn’t a quest for transparency but a political strategy aimed at discrediting and disabling the federal government. The end result is not increased efficiency, but a growing incapacity to govern, driven by a fringe internet ideology that now holds real power.

    DiResta, Renée. “The ‘Twitter Files’ Took Over the Government.” The Atlantic, 23 Mar. 2025, www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/03/disinformation-online-doge-policy/682134.

    Unlocked gift link:
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/03/disinformation-online-doge-policy/682134/?gift=-RYyyhoVwMCBPkXbjlfICswsOKMxSPtJ8a4yeDz9ut4&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

    Key takeaways:

    • Elon Musk’s conspiracy-driven Twitter Files tactics have entered the U.S. government via his leadership of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
    • Misinterpretations of public data are fueling viral misinformation campaigns that justify dismantling parts of the federal government.
    • Influencers on X amplify false claims, often based on out-of-context or misunderstood government records.
    • The narrative framing discredits civil servants and programs, while pushing performative outrage as a basis for real policy decisions.
    • The approach undermines authentic governance, leading to confusion, defunded agencies, and weakened public trust.
    • The original intent of the Twitter Files was not reform, but delegitimization of institutions and centralized authority.

    Most important quotations:

    • “Internet fantasies have become a sufficient pretext for crippling the government.”
    • “Musk’s interventions in public policy are governed by the same logic he used in 2022 when publicizing the so-called Twitter Files.”
    • “The goal of the Twitter Files-and now the Government Files-was never to provide authentic transparency or deliver reform; it was to discredit organizations and their leaders.”
    • “Musk and his allies are the government now.”
    • “Americans will face a problem far worse than bureaucratic inefficiency: government incapacity-the deliberate dismantling of the ability to govern at all.”

    Word count of generated summary: 678
    Word count of supplied input: 1,899

    Model version: GPT-4
    Custom GPT name: Summarizer 2

  • The decline In Kansas continues

    The Decline In Kansas Continues
    By Karl Peterjohn, Executive Director Kansas Taxpayers Network
    January 17, 2006

    The relative decline of Kansas continues. This decline is vividly demonstrated when state and federal revenue growth is examined.

    Total federal revenues grew 13.9 percent last year to total $2.142 trillion dollars. This was an increase in federal revenues of $262 billion. This increase was almost twice the percentage rate of growth of Kansas state revenues that grew only 7.1 percent or $322 million in fiscal year 2005 that ended June 30, 2005. The federal revenue figures are for the fiscal year that ended September 30, 2005.

    The variance in this growth between Kansas and the other 49 states is important. This data is another confirmation of two recent reports that compared Kansas economic trends and reported distressing results. K.U. economics professor Art Hall and Wichita State University’s Center for Economic Development and Business Research’s (CEDBR) Janet Harrah have issued separate reports indicating that Kansas is lagging in a number of key economic indicators.

    Harrah’s 2005 report showed that income, population, and job growth were lagging in Kansas. This CEDBR study looked at all 50 states using six measurements for population growth, income, and jobs (see: www.wichita.edu/cedbr/). Kansas lags nationally and, even more distressing, was at or near the bottom in almost every category used in this 10 year survey from 1994-2003. Harrah’s study used the most recent 10 year period of federal data that was available.

    Professor Hall’s “Local Government and the Kansas Productivity Puzzle,” focused upon weak productivity in Kansas as well as the sizable growth in government that appears to be a factor in the poor level of productivity growth. Hall’s work was particularly distressing due to the fact that Kansas scored poorly among all plains regional states in most of the measurements he examined. So not only was Kansas lagging nationally, it was also lagging regionally (see: www.cae.business.ku.edu).

    Kansas is a laggard being pulled by the faster growing parts of the United States. This state has an economic growth problem that must be addressed due to the high taxes and resulting high level of government spending in this state. This is a reality that can certainly be ignored by state policy makers in Topeka. However, this is a reality that cannot be denied. Kansas is in economic trouble.

  • Academic Study Challenges Projections of Green Jobs

    Global warming alarmists often argue that transforming our economy to reliance on “green” sources of energy is good because millions of jobs will be created. These new green jobs, it is claimed, will drive our economy forward and create wealth.

    In Kansas, our governor believes in green jobs. She was a keynote speaker at a recent “Good jobs, green jobs” conference. Our likely incoming governor Mark Parkinson speaks the same language.

    A just-released study from the University of Illinois adds to the critical body of evidence that shows that many of the claims made about green jobs aren’t true. From the press release announcing this study:

    While acknowledging the importance of energy conservation and ongoing research and investment into new technologies, the authors set out to evaluate the fundamental soundness of green job claims. In aggregate, the academic team’s study concludes that a lack of sound research methods, erroneous economic assumptions and technological omissions have routinely been utilized to lend support, rather than provide legitimate analysis, to major public policies and government spending initiatives. Furthermore, the reports that were reviewed have been issued without the benefit of peer-reviewed analysis or transparency of their models and calculations. (emphasis added)

    Furthermore:

    Key findings of the study show that no definition for green jobs exists causing great discrepancy in how numbers are counted; that green job estimates often include huge numbers of clerical, bureaucratic and administrative positions that do not produce goods or services for consumption; and that problematic assumptions are made about economic predictions, prices and technology advancements leading some to ultimately favor mandates over free market realities. These serious flaws, as well as the failure to include technical data, render the prevailing green job estimates virtually unreliable.

    These are the myths identified by the authors:

    • Everyone understands what a “green job” is.
    • Creating green jobs will boost productive employment.
    • Green jobs forecasts are reliable.
    • Green jobs promote employment growth.
    • The world economy can be remade by reducing trade and relying on local production and reduced consumption without dramatically decreasing our standard of living.
    • Government mandates are a substitute for free markets.
    • Imposing technological progress by regulation is desirable.

    The study comes out of the University of Illinois College of Law. An article about the study with an easy-to-read (short) summary of the myths may be read by clicking on 7 Myths About Green Jobs. The full study is at Green Jobs Myths.

  • Rebuilding Joplin

    Economic Freedom has a story about the rebuilding of Joplin, Missouri after last year’s devastating tornado.

    Daniel J. Smith, economics professor at Troy University, studied the rebuilding of Joplin, Missouri in the months following the tornado. The following video discusses how economic freedom can help areas recover from natural disasters. Says Smith:

    I think one of the key factors in the recovery process in Joplin, from the tornado, is that the government officials allowed the community to start rebuilding itself. I think Joplin is a great example of the power of people — free people — coming together and both using profit motive, in the businesses, using religious reasons for faith-based organizations, and just concern for your fellow man, in the community-based organizations, to rebuild a disaster stricken community.

    In the video, Smith explains that rising wages — sometimes increasing over 500 percent — were strong market signals that certain types of labor were needed in Joplin. If these prices for labor were controlled through government regulation, the price signals would not be heard by the needed laborers. Yes, governments and news media might let the country know that these types of workers are needed in Joplin. But unless workers can earn high wages in Joplin, what motive do they have to leave their current homes and travel to Joplin?

    The price system — operating in markets free from government regulation — proves again to be the most efficient way to allocate resources to where they are most urgently needed and valued.

  • National Transit Database, an interactive visualization

    National Transit Database, an interactive visualization

    An interactive visualization of data over time from the National Transit Database.

    Do you wonder how much it costs to run your transit system? The National Transit Database holds data for transit systems in the U.S. I’ve gathered some key statistics and presented them in an interactive visualization.

    In the case of Wichita, we see that “OpExp per PMT” for 2015 is $1.02. This is total operating expense per passenger mile traveled. It’s not the cost to move a bus a mile down the street. It’s the cost to move one passenger one mile. And, it is operating cost only, which means the costs of the buses are not included.

    Some definitions used in the database:

    • UZA: The name of the urbanized area served primarily by a transit agency.
    • UPT: Unlinked passenger trips.
    • PMT: Passenger miles traveled.
    • Total OpExp: Total operating expense.

    The visualization holds three tabs. One is a table of figures. The other two illustrate data for a single transit system or single mode.

    Click here to access the visualization.

    Example from the visualization for Wichita. Click for larger.
  • How Trump Insists on Thanks From Zelensky and Other Foreign Leaders

    One-sentence summary:
    President Donald Trump has increasingly demanded public expressions of gratitude from foreign leaders, particularly allies like Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, reshaping U.S. diplomacy into a transactional and performative exercise centered on personal recognition.

    In a recent phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, President Donald Trump received repeated public acknowledgments of thanks, which the White House emphasized heavily in its official statements. This episode exemplifies a pattern in Trump’s diplomacy, where he expects public and personal gratitude from foreign leaders, especially allies who rely on U.S. support. The approach diverges sharply from traditional diplomatic norms that prioritize mutual strategic interests and discretion.

    This dynamic was especially evident during an Oval Office meeting with Zelensky, where Vice President JD Vance reprimanded him for insufficient gratitude, and Trump concluded by labeling the Ukrainian leader as unthankful. The contrast with Trump’s more cordial and gratitude-free interaction with Russian President Vladimir Putin highlights his inconsistent expectations based on perceived loyalty and deference.

    While presidents have previously expressed frustration with allies privately, Trump’s method involves public displays of appreciation as a litmus test for continued support. Administration officials, such as spokesman Harrison Fields, have defended this as an appropriate exchange for American military and financial assistance. This has had a noticeable effect on international behavior, with leaders like NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and Ireland’s prime minister adjusting their public messaging to flatter Trump.

    Members of Trump’s administration have followed suit. Secretary of State Marco Rubio criticized Poland’s foreign minister online for a lack of gratitude over technology aid, reinforcing the expectation that U.S. assistance must be reciprocated with praise. Critics, including policy experts like Michael Froman, Kori Schake, and Matt Duss, argue that this approach reduces alliances to subordination and liken it to a “protection racket,” fundamentally altering the values underpinning U.S. foreign relations.

    Trump’s approach represents a marked shift in American diplomacy, elevating performative loyalty and personal acknowledgment above policy-driven or strategic cooperation, with implications for how both allies and adversaries engage with the United States.

    Green, Erica L. “How Trump Insists on Thanks From Zelensky and Other Foreign Leaders.” The New York Times, 23 Mar. 2025, www.nytimes.com/2025/03/23/us/politics/trump-zelensky-foreign-diplomacy.html.

    Key takeaways:

    • Trump expects overt public gratitude from allies as part of diplomatic engagement.
    • His style departs from norms of mutual interest and behind-the-scenes diplomacy.
    • Zelensky was directly confronted about a perceived lack of appreciation.
    • Trump treats international support as a personal favor rather than a strategic policy.
    • Foreign leaders and U.S. officials are adapting to this gratitude-based diplomacy.
    • Critics argue the approach undermines traditional alliances and fosters a dominance-based model.

    Most important quotations:

    • “You’re not acting at all thankful. And that’s not a nice thing.” – Donald Trump to Zelensky
    • “That does sort of signal a fundamentally different notion of order than we have had for the last 80 years.” – Michael Froman
    • “Every U.S. president should demand that from both allies and adversaries.” – Harrison Fields
    • “What this signals is that in a strictly transactional global order, if you humble yourself in front of the American president, you can get what you want.” – Kori Schake
    • “If you want protection, you have to show respect to the boss, and you’ve got to pay upstairs.” – Matt Duss

    Word count of summary: 663
    Word count of input: 1,183

    Model version used: GPT-4
    Custom GPT name: Summarizer 2