League pass blacks out cable games, including this one and the entire playoffs.

I agree with the Casino posts.

DOJ has jurisdiction over a fairly narrow set of issues though, like bribery/FCPA and criminal matters. That's good but it would take the FTC to break up a hospital system or HMO, and that would take an act by congress and/or a better SCOTUS.

The state could pass more regulations regarding hospitals, as long as it's not preempted. But state anti trust law is complicated in that some things would preempted and some would not, but either way, I don't imagine new laws passing a divided state legislature that does very little except at budget time. PA anti trust law is generally aimed at gas station price fixing, resale price maintenance, bid rigging for state contracts -- not at big stuff that the feds handle like corporate mergers.

The Vanderbilt piece is from 1999 when, say it says, circuit courts were divided on the non profit factor. The way the case law has since settled is the FTC retains jurisdiction to review mergers regardless of status, it is prohibited to enforce anti trust laws against non profit health care entities generally. UPMC's growth lately has not been mergers but building new facilities.

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/1520570/slaughter_-_hospital_speech_5-14-19.pdf

https://www.healthleadersmedia.com/strategy/nonprofit-hospitals-and-antitrust-enforcement-should-ftc-have-jurisdiction

FTC Chairman Joseph Simons said his team would like to do more to address Grassley's concerns but that they are butting up against statutory limitations.

"We're very interested in looking at unilateral conduct by hospitals, that are problematic under the antitrust laws," Simons said. "But, generally when we do that, we find that they're nonprofits, and we don't have jurisdiction over them."

"That's another reason why we've been asking the Congress to eliminate our exemption for nonprofits," Simons said.

"Gosh, I never gave that any thought," Grassley replied. "We ought to consider that."

I'm generalizing a bit. The DOJ retains jurisdiction over non profit hospitals but a more narrow set of issues, but has gone after some for wage collusion.

They're not different issues because congress has granted anti trust exemptions to non profit hospital systems, and seems unlikely to change that.

There is a non profit exemption with hospital systems in antitrust law, so it would have to come back to the non profit issue anyway, unless congress would pass a law taking away the anti trust exemption.

• It was $115 million in pledges including money the non profits are already spending on charitable giving over 5 years. No new dollars actually hit the streets in seven-ish years of negotiations. UPMC would have done a significant $40 million up front on housing (with a possible preference for their own employees?), but then the combined contribution of every non profit would have been only about $15 million a year for five years, including loans (see below.) There was no commitment beyond the five years.
• None of them money would have been democratically accountable to elected government/the citizens since they would have gone to the One Pittsburgh non profit organization who had an un-elected board of directors. So if Pitt said they wanted their contribution to go to a Mon Valley connector, they could have determined that since it wouldn't have gone through city budgeting/voting.
• The $115 million also would have included low interest loans -- which is hardly a grant -- from PNC, Citizens, and FNB to community development organizations.

If Peduto got the proposal operating in time, maybe he would have been re-elected, but he didn't.

When? They've never followed through in 2013 because Peduto pulled the lawsuit after winning election, so we don't know what will happen. But there have been four cases recently of hospitals losing HUP test challenges even for main facilities, never mind the sort of parking lot/empty lot parcels that this administration is starting with

https://twitter.com/MayorEdGainey/status/1640727748145475585

Here you go

They've never had to fight that long in Pittsburgh. Peduto pulled the lawsuit shortly after Ravensthal began it, starting a pointless eight year negotiation over a non PILOT for his "One Pittsburgh" plan that got us no where. But in hospitals they bought that where a PILOT was in place, UPMC has honored it:

https://www.publicsource.org/erie-hospital-pilot-upmc-ahn-pittsburgh-gainey

"In 2020, Erie collected $13.39 per capita in PILOT contributions. Pittsburgh collected $1.07."

It gives a chance to escalate during possible negotiations too imho.

Some really interesting stuff from the list of parcels: one is owned by a fired cop convicted of sexual abuse. I have no clue how it got non profit status. Another is a museum that seems mostly to be a wedding venue and another is a private swimming pool in a development. This is only after auditing the first 10% of properties.

They claim even physically disconnected parking lots and empty lots for future development that they own are non profit as well. I do not think if these cases go through the HUP test that UPMC will prevail.

Good points. Yale does a lot more for New Haven as well. Pottstown hospital is even paying 50% (I think) of a full tax rate as a PILOT as a major benefit to its school district.

Yes almost definitely. It reads to me "hey we're going after your parking facilities and empty lots now, and those are not charitable so we'll win. Settle before we challenge Presby Hospital..."

Considering some successful challenges of hospitals like Pottstown, it'd be wise for the big non profits to settle before they get HUP test cases from a state Supreme Court that labor helped elect.