Enclosed please find a copy of my telegram to Dr. Steven Jonas and a copy of his response thereto. Also enclosed is my most recent mailgram to him of February 6, 1979. In reference to your conversation with my legislative assistant on February 7, 1979, I cannot accept the fact that Dr. Jonas is bound to refer specific inquiries regarding his interpretation of the contract to your Agency. Therefore, in view of his response, to insure that Federal expenditures are being spent in the best interests of the residents of New Orleans, and of the American taxpayer, I think it important that you likewise answer the questions directed to Dr. Jonas. Specifically, in your employment of Dr. Jonas as an independent contractor have you directed him to study the feasibility of acute care at F. Edward Hebert Hospital? 2. a. b. If not, why not? If not, have you asked him to comment on the Have you required him to objectively test the assumption that "this naval facility might serve the general public better in some capacity other than that for which it was originally designed, and that its use as an acute care hospital could prove a disservice?' a. Have you directed him to take into consideraation the unique geographic boundaries of West Bank residents and the fact that tolls will be imposed this summer on the Mississippi River bridge? b. Within the parameters of his studies is it c. If such a finding is precluded by the terms so. Please understand that the purpose of my writing is to assure that the people of the First Congressional District receive a fair and impartial study. I intend to insure this fairness through either informal inquiry or formal Congressional investigation. I hope you will do me the courtesy of answering my questions immediately. Sincerely, RLL:m ROBERT L. LIVINGSTON Member of Congress School of Medicine Department of Community Medicine HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER State University of New York at Stony Brook Stony Brook, New York 11794 February 8, 1979 RECEIVED Hon. Robert L. Livingston House of Representative Dear Mr. Livingston: Responding to the undisguised threat stated in your telegram of 2/6/79, I herein reply to the questions of your telegram of 1/26/79. ✔ Question: Are you studying the feasibility of acute care beds at FEHH? ✓ Answer: No. ✓ Question: If not, why not? ✓ Answer: Because I was hired, and was paid, to examine only alternatives to acute care beds. ✓Question: If not, would you comment on the use of Hebert as an acute care facility? ✔ Answer: Since I have not studied that alternative, I have no specific comment to make on it. In general terms, the arguments made in the New Orleans Health Systems Agency's Health Systems Plan on the over-bedding situation in the New Orleans Parish seem reasonable to me. Question: Are you objectively testing the assumption that this naval facility might serve the general public better in some capacity other than that for which it was originally designed, and that its use as an acute care hospital could prove a disservice? Answer: The answer, a quite lengthy one, to the first part of the question is contained in the consultant team's final report, which will be available shortly, and will be sent to you at our earliest convenience. We were not asked or paid to conVsider the issue raised in the second part of the question. Question: If so, are you taking into consideration the unique geo graphic boundaries of west bank residents and the fact that tolls will be imposed this summer on the Mississippi River Bridge? Answer: Once again, we were not asked to consider that question. Question: Within the parameters of your studies, is it possible that you might conclude that this hospital would best serve the public if it were used as an acute care facility, or do the parameters of the study completely preclude such a finding? Answer: Within the parameters of our study, we were not asked to consider that question. I must add, however, that I find your persistent interest in the question of using the Hebert as an acute care facility somewhat puzzling. I know of no proposal to do that. The Jo Ellen Smith proposal would devote most of the space to long-term care, which is close to what we propose. However, the New Orleans HSA will be undertaking Section 1122 review of that proposal, and would consider a proposal to use the hospital as an acute care facility in its entirety through the same mechanism. I have every confidence in their ability to carry out such a review in the best interests of the public. Mr. Livingston, I do not take kindly to threats from anyone. Obviously, when they come from a Congressman, I respond, but not happily. As a citizen of a free country, I hope that I will not be subject to any more threats from you. However, just in case my hope is dashed, I am consulting legal counsel to determine my rights in such an instance. P.S. Staren (Jonas, M.D. I would be delighted to appear before an appropriate body of the Thank you for your letter of February 8, 1979, answering the questions posed in my telegram of January 26, 1979, and my mailgram of February 6, 1978. It I regret that you interpreted the comments. in my February 6, 1979, mailgram as a threat.. Such was not the case. I simply needed an answer, immediately, is my duty as a Member of Congress to protect the interests, not only of my constituents in the First Congressional District, but of all taxpayers, particularly when it involves the expenditure of federal funds. Frankly, I am very much disappointed with the antire tone of your letter. Had you answered my questions of January 26, my subsequent mailgram would not have been necessary. It puzzles me that anyone employed with federal funds would feel threatened by a simple inquiry. into the circumstances and conditions of his employment. In any event, thanking you again for the pertinent portions of your response, I remain . Sincerely, RLLIM ROBERT L. LIVINGSTON |