I was most unhappy to be informed of your introduction of H.R. 3194 on These many hundreds of volunteers have conducted their affairs in the public interest and within the parameters established by Public Law 93-641. They have not overstepped the boundaries of this most significant "grassroots" legislation, but have made an effort to fairly represent the needs and desires of all citizens of this area. The documents of this Agency are evidence of deliberate action to remove All items related to Family Planning have been removed from our Implementation Plans and individual communities have the responsibility for any future activity in this area. In addition, a new goal has been added to our Plan which specifically states that sex education and family life education are the responsibility of the family. I would like to reiterate our concern, and we know it is also your concern, that in a free and participatory society, "grassroots" planning should be fostered and guarded lest we loose that freedom. All citizens need a forum to be heard. We are privileged to have had the opportunity to provide that forum on a multiplicity of health issues. Where else can such varied health issues be so intensively examined and debated by all of your constituents? This is an opportunity for democratic process that must not be lost. I would like to thank you for your concern in reviewing my comment, and would Respectfully, Marjorie R. Quandt Marjorie Quandt, President HSA/KLM Board of Directors The F. Edward Hebert Hospital was constructed and opened by the U.S. Ravy in New Orleans two years ago. Since the initial expenditure of approximately $22 million in construction costs, the Navy has maintained the facility at an annual cost of roughly $4 million per year, only to find that the original reasons for building the hospital were no longer in force. The Navy has discontinued its plans to make New Orleans a major base for laval operations, and, unfortunately, the plans were changed only after the Hebert Hospital was almost complete. Subsequently, the Naval Hospital opened its doors, and the Navy found that there was insufficient need among military personnel in the New Orleans area to justify its continued operation. The Navy considered several alternatives with respect to the future of the building, and several studies were performed by the Navy, the GAO, and the Congress. In addition, U.S. Public Health and the Veterans Administration were consulted, but declined an interest in the facility. The Navy also extended its offer of the facility to the general public for competitive bids, a process which was entirely open and fair, and which left the door open to all reasonable proposals. Presumably, the Navy's priorities in rendering a decision included the maximization of potential of the $22 million, 250-bed facility, access to the building by the Navy in the event of national emergency, the provision of in-patient and out-patient care to military and retired military personnel and their dependents in the area, the return on the investment for the taxpayers, and the medical needs of private citizens in the immediate area. Our purpose in writing you is to notify you that all of these considerations and others have been met. Following several open requests for proposals, certain proposals were submitted to the Navy. Now the Navy has announced its acceptance and completion of negotiations with a local private hospital, Jo Ellen Smith Hospital, located on the West Bank of the City of New Orleans. The Navy has submitted a decommission report to the Congress, through the House Armed Services Committee, which provides for a lease (copy attached) of the F. Edward Hebert facility to the administration of Jo Ellen Smith Hospital, subject to the following conditions, among others: A) B) D) The lessee must demonstrate that it has a complete In addition to service provided to private patients, c) The Navy shall maintain ambulatory care facilities E) The Congress shall ensure compliance with the foregoing objectives and may, when necessary, re-direct the Navy to reopen the facility as a Naval hospital. We respectfully ask the Secretary of KEW to approve the lease of the facility by the Jo Ellen Smith Memorial Hospital. In making that determination, we urge you to consider the following factors: 1) Jo Ellen Smith Hospital is financially sound, and 2) The proximity of the existing Jo Ellen Smith Hospital to the Hebert Hospital assists coordination of health care between the two facilities. 3) 4) 5) The Jo Ellen Smith proposal meets the goals of The use of the building is restricted by the resolu- 7) In case of war or national emergency, the cost of mobilization of this facility, if it were to remain closed would be extremely high. Under the proposal, this cost would be negligible. In addition to the reasons stated above, the plan proposed by Jo Ellen Smith Hospital would establish a precedent joining the government with the private sector to save taxpayer dollars while providing increased medical services to the surrounding community. We feel this is very much in line with the administration's concern about the cost of medical care. We believe this lease agreement to be in the best interests of New Orleans, the State of Louisiana and the country as a whole in terms of both economy and medical service. Most important, it enables the Navy to keep the commitment it has made to military personnel, their dependents and retired military residing on the West Bank of the Mississippi River, all of whom have become dependent upon the F.E.H.H. for vital medical care. Accordingly, we ask the Secretary of HEW to join the members of the Louisiana Congressional delegation who represent the greater New Orleans area and the United States Navy in approving the lease of the F.E.H.H. by the Jo Ellen Smith Hospital. Critic Takes Issue With F. Edward Hebert Hospital By John Pope is opinion came today from Jes Organization that has power |