100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

July 28, 1981 - Image 1

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1981-07-28

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

The Michigan Daly
Vol. XCI, No. 49-S Ann Arbor, Michigan-Tuesday, July 28, 1981 Ten Cents Twelve Pages
Reagan asks
nation for tax
WASHINGTON (AP) - President called the president "a super
Reagan asked Americans last night to salesman."
rally behind his tax cut instead of the But O'Neill said the issue is simply
"empty promise" offered by House that the Democratic tax bill favors
Democrats and, at the same time, working American families earning
assured older citizens they have less than $50,000, while the Republican
nothing to fear in his approach to Social bill favors people making more than
Security. $50,000. The GOP measure, he asserted,
Reagan said the choice facing "is geared to the wealthy of America."
Congress this week on the competing O'Neill chided the president for
tax programs is really between "a tax focusing his broadcast address to the
cut or a tax increase." nation od taxes rather than the con-
AS FOR Social Security, the next dition of the Social Security system.
major issue on the legislative horizon,
3^he told his audience that "you have no MEANWHILE, Senate Democratic
reason to be frightened" about the Leader Robert Byrd sent Reagan a let-
s y financial integrity of the retirement ter asking, "How can we explain an
vsystem. economic plan.. .which inordinately
The president mentioned Social rewards the already-rich with huge tax
Security only in passing in his 24- cuts which are partially financed by
minute address to a nationwide cutting the Social Security benefits of
television audience. He vowed that no the nation's elderly?"
one in real need will be deprived of
benefits despite two decades of finan- "It appears that the administration
cial problems with the program. has abandoned its promise not to cut
.,"You will continue to receive your Social Security retirement benefits,"
checks in the full amount due you," said Byrd said in his letter, released to
Reagan. "In any plan to restore fiscal reporters before Reagan's address.
Daily Photo by KIM HILL integrity of Social Security, I per- The president's program calls for a
sonally will see that no part of the plan three-year, 25 percent across-the-board
'W e re the heck is A gell IH al'? will be at the expense of you who are reduction in personal tax rates. Begin-
now dependent on your monthly Social ning in 1985 the tax system would be
A confused University new-comer, apparently lost in the maze of campus Security checks." permanently indexed against inflation
buildings, consults his handy-dandy campus map for help in the shadow of AFTER REAGAN'S address, House to prevent automatic increases in
Angell Hall. Speaker Thomas O'Neill (D-Mass.), taxes.
COST INCREASE PROPOSAL STILL IN APPROVAL PROCESS:
'U' Hospital debate continues

By JENNIFER MILLER
Daily staff writer
Two years after the original cost proposal, the
University Hospital Replacement Project is still being
debated by health planning officials.
University Hospital planners obtained permission
last month from the Michigan Legislature and Gov.
William Milliken for a $75 million increase in the
project's budget over the original $210 million cost
ceiling imposed in 1979.
IN GOING DIRECTLY to the governor and the
state legislature for approval of the project, however,
the University officials temporarily side-stepped the
Comprehensive Health Planning Council of
Southeastern Michigan, a public planning group
which must review such projects, and the state
Department of Public Health, which will make the
final decision on the cost increase.
Later, after receiving the University Regents' ap-
proval earlier this month, the University brought its
request for a cost increase back to CHPC-SEM.
LAST WEEK, two committees within CHPC-SEM
made opposing decisions concerning the Hospital's
cost increase request.

The CHPC-SEM Washtenaw County sub-area
council unanimously recommended the approval of
the new $285 million budget. In the next step of the
approval process, the CHPC-SEM Project Review
Committee narrowly rejected the increase two days
later.
Blue Cross-Blue Shield of Michigan strongly op-
posed the ceiling hike "because of (the Project's)
elaborate scope and high costs," according to the
position statement presented to the committee.
BC-BSM said the Replacement Project would in-
crease hospital operating costs by $30 million a year,
or more than 25 percent. The statement added that
the new increase would up patient costs per day by
more than $100. In 1979, CHPC-SEM planners predic-
ted that patient costs would rise from the present $371
per day to $1,069 per day in 1990 dollars, when the
project should be completed.
CHPC-SEM and Blue Cross also questioned the
prior hike approval obtained from the governor and
the legislature, saying that the Hospital had
deliberately side-stepped the public approval process
through CHPC-SEM.
THE CHPC-SEM Executive Committee will review

the Hospital's request and the Review Committee's
recommendation on August 11. Although there is a
divergence of opinions on the Project within CHPC-
SEM, there are indications that the Executive Com-
mittee will uphold the Review Committee's recom-
mendation to reject the cost increase. A former CH-
PC-SEM member said the Executive Committee has
a "strong history" of approving recommendations
made to it by lower committees.
CHPC-SEM President Della Goodwin said, "The
action by the (Project Review) Committee means we
don't want this project at $285 million." The cost is
the main stumbling block, Goodwin said, "I don't
think anyone on the Executive Committee questions
the need for the University Hospital."
Goodwin added, "It is the most expensive hospital
ever conceived in the U.S., and now we're making it
even more expensive." She noted the Hospital's
original asking price of $351 million, and said, "it
looks like we're inching our way back up the scale."
UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL planners say that since
the $210 million cost ceiling was approved, financing
and interest costs have skyrocketed.
See HEALTH, Page 2

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan