.
The project is expected to provide extremely valuable information that will greatly benefit the government at little cost to the doctors. "Reports will present aggregate data, and individuals will not be identified," explained a health official. Although the federal health officials assure the doctors that the data will be kept confidential, many doctors are outraged at the idea (Pear).
"I don't like the idea of the government snooping," said Dr. Raymond Scalettar, an internist in Washington. "It's a pernicious practice - Big Brother tactics, which should be opposed" (Pear). .
Dr. George J. Petruncio, a family doctor in Turnersville, NJ, agreed, "This is not a way to build trust in government. Why should I trust someone who does not correctly identify himself?" (Pear). .
Dr. Stephen C. Albrecht, from Olympia, Wash., said, "If federal officials are worried about access to care, they could help us. They don't have to spy on us" (Pear). .
"Is this a good use of tax money? Probably not. Everybody with a brain knows we do not have enough doctors," said Dr. Robert L. Hogue, a family doctor in Brownwood, TX. The initial survey will cost $347,370, and Dr. Hogue believes this money should be allocated towards training or reimbursement of primary care doctors (Pear). .
After passing new health care laws to increase the supply of primary doctors, the government is hoping that this program will help them to monitor the success of those laws. Medicare patients, who are 65 and older or disabled can typically find a doctor, but the government is constantly threatening to cut the fees paid to doctors for accepting these patients. Although Congress typically reverts this decision before the fees are actually reduced, doctors are hesitant to treat patients in case they do eventually get cut. On the other hand, most doctors do not accept Medicaid, or low-income, patients because the reimbursement fees are extremely low.