I've read the report you mention, and indeed the study did reach the conclusion that not-for-profits as a rule provided higher quality. We are all aware that there are some very high-quality for-profit facilities, and we all know some of them, but as a rule, that was the conclusion of that report. It certainly influenced us in our decision to proceed with the bill as we did.
It's clear that there is the same philosophical divide when there's a for-profit motive as there is, for example, with the proponents of for-profit health care. When you have to worry about making a profit out of addressing health care needs, there is less attention to the specific health care needs of the patient. Similarly, one could conclude that the attention should be on the development of the child—cognitive, emotional, and so on—rather than on eking out a profit. That was the rationale of our not-for-profit starting point in the bill.