A defacto stranglehold on health care is bad enough.
What’s the other side of the deal mentioned in the article about? That they are charitably favored by the State, and that that might be at stake? I thought UP was a private university, unlike, say Penn State.
Pitt, along with Temple, are “state related” universities.
Ostensibly private, but the Commonwealth started kicking in a big chunk of their operating budgets back in the early 70’s, supposedly to keep tuition down (yeah, how did THAT work out?)
Thus we get the worst of both worlds....states that suckle at the public teat, yet are not under direct control like Penn State or the state university system.
UPMC at this point has almost nothing to do with the university from which it got its name.