I was surprised and disappointed that The Crimson chose to publish the op-ed from Jeff M.A. Hauser ’95 last week attacking my integrity without reaching out to me to check facts or context with me.

Had The Crimson contacted me, I would have made three points contradicting Hauser’s arguments.

First, my biography, which is prominently displayed on my personal website (and linked on my Harvard Kennedy School faculty page), references my extensive consulting and board work in the financial and technology sectors and specifically names the most significant of my involvements, including OpenAI.

The biography on my website reads: “He is an advisor to businesses and investors and serves on the board of Doma, OpenAI and SkillSoft Corporation. He also consults with or advises a range of companies in the finance and technology sector, including D. E. Shaw & Co and Citi.”

Second, I had no direct financial interest in Silicon Valley Bank nor in Circle, a large depositor in SVB. Hauser points only to firms with which I had minor advisory relations that themselves had minor positions (on which I did not advise) in Circle. My concern regarding SVB, shared by the vast majority of economists, financial experts and policymakers, was with cascading bank runs leading to economic and financial crisis.

Third, I have frequently urged public policy positions adverse to the economic interests of businesses I advise on a host of issues ranging from full taxation of carried interest, to more stringent banking stress tests, to increased corporate taxation, to stock option accounting, to increased Internal Revenue Service auditing.

I have admired The Crimson for nearly 50 years since coming to Harvard in 1975. I know that especially at this time of crisis at Harvard your student editors can provide the community with more accurate and significant editorial content.

— Lawrence H. Summers, Charles W. Eliot University Professor and former Harvard president

Letters to the Editor must respond directly and explicitly to either an opinion piece recently published on the Editorial page, or else to The Crimson’s manner of coverage within any section of the newspaper. Letters that respond to the subject matter of a non-opinion Crimson article, rather than The Crimson’s coverage of that matter, will not be accepted.

Letters to the Editor are evaluated at the discretion of the Editorial Chairs. They should be submitted to editorial@thecrimson.com and should run between 150 and 350 words. We require Letters to the Editor to be signed, with the signatures appearing on the page or as a hyperlinked list at the discretion of the Editorial Chairs. We do not accept Letters to the Editor from organizations or anonymous writers.