In this task, you are given news articles and you need to generate a highlight, i.e., a short summary, with a maximum length of 10 lines.

Example Input: LONDON, England (CNN) -- London commuters crammed onto buses, scrambled for taxis, cycled or simply walked on Wednesday as a strike by Tube workers shut down most of the subway network. Commuters queue for packed buses in London on Wednesday morning. The strike began Tuesday at 7 p.m. (2 p.m. ET) but the first full effects were felt during Wednesday's morning commute. The strike was set to last for 48 hours with a normal service resuming Friday morning, according to Transport for London (TfL), which runs the city's transportation network. The RMT trade union called the strike after talks with management over pay, job cuts, and disciplinary issues broke down. "RMT doesn't resort to industrial action lightly," General Secretary Bob Crow said in a statement. "The fact is that Tube workers have been driven into walking out today." Transport Commissioner Peter Hardy said the talks had been making progress on all issues and he urged the RMT to return to the table. "The RMT leadership says we were close to a deal," Hardy said in a statement. "If that is the case, then they should call off the strike, return to talks ... and resolve this issue without any more disruption to Londoners." TfL was running extra buses and free shuttle services across the River Thames during the strike. Electronic travel cards used for the TfL network were temporarily being allowed on all train lines in greater London, it said. While most services on the Tube were shut because of the strike, one line -- the Northern line -- was running normally and five others were running on a reduced schedule, TfL said. "It's been really good," a girl on Oxford Street told CNN about her commute. "The Northern line is running perfectly." Still, some bus services were packed with commuters who normally ride the underground trains or who failed to find a taxi. "I think we'd all like to strike for more money, but unfortunately we can't," said one woman at Oxford Circus, where the Tube is closed. Others hit the pavement and walked. "It's OK -- quite refreshing," said a man on Regent Street. He said he had just walked from Liverpool Street Station, a train station as well as a Tube stop that is more than 2.5 miles away. The RMT represents about half of the 20,000 employees on the Tube, a TfL spokeswoman said. Other unions including Unite and TSSA represent the rest, she said, and were not on strike.
Example Output: London transport system crippled as Tube workers go on strike .
Normal service not due to resume until Friday morning .
Buses crammed with commuters; many chose to cycle, walk to work .
RMT trade union called strike in dispute over pay, job cuts, disciplinary issues .

Example Input: This week the Supreme Court heard two historic cases on marriage. Even though I was a lawyer in the litigation and in the courthouse both days, I can't predict which way the court will come down. But the outcomes range from nothing at all to fundamentally restructuring the foundational unit of western civilization. Hollingsworth v. Perry is about whether state laws defining marriage as one man and one woman violate the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. United States v. Windsor asks whether Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage for federal law and programs as between one man and one woman, is unconstitutional. DOMA passed in 1996 with 78% of the U.S. House and 85% of the Senate and was signed by President Bill Clinton. The whole nation is focused on the litigation. Ironically, it's possible that neither case will be decided on the merits. In Hollingsworth, California's governor and attorney general abdicated their duties by refusing to defend their state constitution. So pursuant to California law, the sponsors of Prop 8 — officially registered with the state — stepped in to defend the law, represented by Charles Cooper at Cooper Kirk and the Alliance Defending Freedom. In Windsor, the defendant was the federal government. But President Barack Obama declared that he believes DOMA is unconstitutional and ordered his Justice Department not to defend it. So per its rules, the U.S. House voted to authorize Paul Clement  — probably the greatest Supreme Court lawyer practicing today — to defend DOMA. Article III of the Constitution limits the jurisdiction of the federal courts. One requirement is that there must be adversity between the parties. Since the defendants in both cases refused to defend their own laws, the court will consider whether the Constitution allows these third-party legal teams to become a proper party to the lawsuits. There's a second issue in Windsor. Edith Windsor entered into a gay marriage in Canada in 2007 and lived in New York. When her partner died in 2009, Windsor sued to contest the federal estate tax she paid, claiming a spousal exemption. But New York did not create gay marriage until 2011, so Windsor was not harmed by DOMA not allowing the federal government to recognize her marriage, since if the IRS used state definitions Windsor would still be regarded an a single woman. Thus it's possible she lacks standing to sue over the issue. It also raises the issue of whether courts must recognize polygamous marriages, which are legal in dozens of nations worldwide. The swing vote regarding the Article III issues in both cases is probably Chief Justice John Roberts. He openly expressed skepticism in Hollingsworth and led the Court in an hour-long debate in Windsor solely focused on whether the court has jurisdiction. Assuming the court does decide the merits, the implications are historic. Windsor would alter America's system of federalism. Only the states determine who can get married. But the federal government is free to decide whom to confer federal benefits on — largely economic entitlements and federal issues such as immigration. Federalism is a two-way street. But if DOMA Section 3 is invalidated, the states will be able to dictate whom the recipients of federal benefits are. If Windsor is historic, Hollingsworth is earth-shattering. If the Supreme Court declares a constitutional right to marriage other than one-man, one-woman, then all traditional marriage laws in all 50 states will be invalid, and there will be a serious debate (already in a lower federal court) of whether polygamists also have a constitutional right to national recognition. On the merits, the court seems unlikely to declare an unwritten constitutional right to gay marriage, though arguments did not go as well for DOMA. Justice Anthony Kennedy is likely the swing vote in both. As Justice Samuel Alito said this week, the Internet and cell phones have been around on this planet longer than gay marriage. It is an energetic debate in all 50 states, and this summer we will learn whether the Supreme Court will shut down this debate by making it a constitutional issue on which the American people are not allowed to vote.
Example Output: Ken Klukowski: Cases heard by Supreme Court could result in momentous change .
He says there are questions of whether cases could be tossed because of special circumstances .
If court issues sweeping ruling, it could deprive voters of chance to weigh in .
Klukowski: Gay marriage is such a new phenomenon that court shouldn't freeze the debate .

Example Input: While President Obama has reignited a national conversation over rising college costs with his new proposals, those suggestions are unlikely to dramatically lower costs soon. And the president has not given many specific suggestions how to cut these costs that have been rising dramatically faster than people's income. Tuition fees are roughly double the share of income then they were in the 1960s. Let me offer five suggestions on how to lower post-secondary educational costs. This list is not comprehensive, but full implementation of even some of them could reduce the burden that colleges impose on students, parents and taxpayers. First, adopt the three-year bachelor's degree as in Europe. Students at prestigious schools like Oxford and Cambridge receive their degrees in three years, and they still get first-class jobs. Diminishing returns sets into collegiate study like anything else, and much of the material in the last two years of college is of marginal importance, with the possible exception of some demanding majors such as engineering and architecture. The feds could simply say undergraduate student eligibility for financial assistance ends after 90 semester hours of study.  This approach should reduce the cost of a B.A. degree by something on the order of 25%. A less cost-saving variant of the three-year plan would keep the degree at its traditional 120 semester hour length, but have students go to school year-round for three years. We really don't need the summer off to plant crops as people did hundreds of years ago. Facilities would get greater utilization, lowering capital costs. College graduates would gain an extra year working full-time. Faculty usually will teach additional courses for far less than the average pay per course taught regularly. Maintenance costs of facilities per student would also fall. Second, make it possible for students to use MOOCs (massively open online courses) and other low-cost, online options, allowing for lower cost "blended" degrees combining perhaps two years of traditional classroom experience with an equal amount of online training. This would cut the cost of quality degrees perhaps 40%. Without any governmental involvement, teachers and  entrepreneurs have brought hundreds of high-quality but free or low-cost courses to the internet --Udacity, Coursera, EdX, StraighterLine, Saylor Foundation, Khan Academy and Twenty Million Minds Foundation are examples of a few providers or facilitators of quality instruction.  Yet students seldom get credit for these courses.  The barriers are not technological, but legal or involve overcoming special interest obstruction. Students need to be examined on the online material, with safeguards assuring the registered student is actually being tested. Obstacles to accrediting these innovative approaches need to be overcome. The federal government, which accredits the accreditation agencies, could tell these agencies they must allow accredited schools to accept as much as 60% of coursework from MOOC or related providers.  The federal government can't deliver the mail or run a national medical care system efficiently, so they should not be the prime mover here. Where is the Gates Foundation or Warren Buffet when we need them? Third, offer a traditional residential degree for 40% less by dramatically reducing labor and capital costs. The typical university employs twice as many "professional non-instructional personnel" (administrators) per 100 students as it did 40 years ago. Why not create new universities with staffing near the 1970 norms -- a university without sustainability and diversity coordinators or an army of public relations specialists, where faculty teach extensively rather than do trivial research that no one reads, and where there are no expensive intercollegiate athletic programs for the amusement of non-students. Specifically, ask the faculty to teach four classes per semester instead of two or three. Build few buildings but utilize them extensively, including on Fridays, weekends and summer months.  Have a least two faculty members for each administrator (the ratio now is often one to one). Prohibit faculty from teaching trivial courses in their specialty. Do we really need courses on "Lady Gaga and the Sociology of Fame" taught to students who are clueless about  Beethoven, Shakespeare and van Gogh?  Limit the pay of all employees to no more than that of the president of the United States or less.  Could existing universities do this? They haven't, so state governments might have to create new institutions from the ground up. Fourth, create a National College Equivalence Test similar to the high school GED. A good national test of basic reading, writing, mathematical and general knowledge about our institutions and society could be administered by, say, the Scholastic Testing Service, or ACT.  High scores on the test would lead to a "college equivalence certificate." Most students want a diploma as a ticket to a good job. Employers could use scores on the equivalency test as an alternative certification device, and individuals could take the test anytime --even home schooled kids with little formal education. Fifth, get the federal government out of the student financial aid business. There is good evidence the 11.7% annual growth in federal student financial aid over the past decade (and similar growth earlier) has encouraged colleges to raise tuition fees and finance a costly academic arms race. Lower income Americans are a smaller proportion of recent college graduates than in 1970, before Pell Grants began. If we implement the first four reforms, the need for student financial assistance will dramatically decline. The current system breeds high dropout rates, rewards poor performance (students lingering in school get more aid than those graduating promptly) and encourages kids to enter college who would be better off entering trade schools or apprentice programs.  Ending these inefficient federal programs would save tens of billions annually. In short, there are lots of thing we can do to make colleges more affordable beyond the president's idea of providing good consumer information by rating colleges.
Example Output:
President Obama is proposing steps to reduce costs of college .
Richard Vedder says more useful steps would include shortening college to three years .
He says the number of administrators has grown too much, other costs could be cut .
Vedder: Year-round schooling and online teaching would do much to reduce tuition .

