[Senate Hearing 119-360]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




                                                        S. Hrg. 119-360

                           THE DOCTOR IS OUT:
                         HOW WASHINGTON'S RULES
                    DROVE PHYSICIANS OUT OF MEDICINE

=======================================================================



                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                       SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS


                             SECOND SESSION
                               __________

                             WASHINGTON, DC
                               __________

                           FEBRUARY 11, 2026
                               __________

                           Serial No. 119-24

         Printed for the use of the Special Committee on Aging
         
         
         
         
                 [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                 
                 
                 

        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
        
                               ______
                                 

                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

63-404 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2026








                       SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING

                     RICK SCOTT, Florida, Chairman

DAVE McCORMICK, Pennsylvania         KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York
JIM JUSTICE, West Virginia           ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts
TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama            MARK KELLY, Arizona
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               RAPHAEL WARNOCK, Georgia
ASHLEY MOODY, Florida                ANDY KIM, New Jersey
JON HUSTED, Ohio                     ANGELA ALSOBROOKS, Maryland

                              ----------
                              
                McKinley Lewis, Majority Staff Director
                Claire Descamps, Minority Staff Director
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              

                                                                   Page

Opening Statement of Senator Rick Scott, Chairman................     1
Opening Statement of Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand, Ranking 
  Member.........................................................     2

                           PANEL OF WITNESSES

Alma Littles, M.D., Dean & Chief Academic Officer, Florida State 
  University College of Medicine, Tallahassee, Florida...........     4
Lee Gross, M.D., Founder, Epiphany Health Direct Primary Care, 
  North Port, Florida............................................     6
Jeffrey Smith, CPA, MBA, FACMPE, CGMA, Incoming Board Chair of 
  Medical Group Management Association (MGMA), Chief Executive 
  Officer, Piedmont Healthcare, PA, Statesville, North Carolina..     8
Corey Feist, JD, MBA, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer, 
  Lorna Breen Heroes' Foundation, Charlottesville, Virginia......    10

                                APPENDIX
                                
                      Prepared Witness Statements

Alma Littles, M.D., Dean & Chief Academic Officer, Florida State 
  University College of Medicine, Tallahassee, Florida...........    28
Lee Gross, M.D., Founder, Epiphany Health Direct Primary Care, 
  North Port, Florida............................................    31
Jeffrey Smith, CPA, MBA, FACMPE, CGMA, Incoming Board Chair of 
  Medical Group Management Association (MGMA), Chief Executive 
  Officer, Piedmont Healthcare, PA, Statesville, North Carolina..    38
Corey Feist, JD, MBA, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer, 
  Lorna Breen Heroes' Foundation, Charlottesville, Virginia......    48

                        Questions for the Record

Alma Littles, M.D., Dean & Chief Academic Officer, Florida State 
  University College of Medicine, Tallahassee, Florida...........    57
Lee Gross, M.D., Founder, Epiphany Health Direct Primary Care, 
  North Port, Florida............................................    61
Jeffrey Smith, CPA, MBA, FACMPE, CGMA, Incoming Board Chair of 
  Medical Group Management Association (MGMA), Chief Executive 
  Officer, Piedmont Healthcare, PA, Statesville, North Carolina..    64
Corey Feist, JD, MBA, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer, 
  Lorna Breen Heroes' Foundation, Charlottesville, Virginia......    66

                       Statements for the Record

American Academy of Dermatology Statement........................    71
American Academy of Family Physicians Statement..................    75
American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons Statement...........    85
American Clinical Neurophysiology Society Statement..............    88
American Economic Liberties: Healthcare Middlemen Statement......    90
American Economic Liberties: Medicare Advantage Statement........    95
American Economic Liberties: One Big Beautiful Bill Statement....   136
American Economic Liberties: United Health Group Statement.......   140
American Hospital Association Statement..........................   143
American Physcial Therapy Association Statement..................   146
American Podiatric Medical Association Statement.................   156























                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              

                   Statements for the Record (cont'd)

American Society of Health-System Pharmacists Statement..........   159
American Society of Hematology Statement.........................   173
American Society of Retina Specialists Statement.................   176
Primary Care Collaborative Statement.............................   184
Regulatory Relief Coalition Statement............................   187
Ryan McClenahan Statement........................................   190
Society of General Internal Medicine Statement...................   194








 
                           THE DOCTOR IS OUT:
                         HOW WASHINGTON'S RULES
                    DROVE PHYSICIANS OUT OF MEDICINE

                              ----------                              


                      Wednesday, February 11, 2026

                                        U.S. Senate
                                 Special Committee on Aging
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:35 p.m., Room 
216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Rick Scott, Chairman of 
the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senator Scott, Moody, Gillibrand, Warnock, and 
Alsobrooks.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR 
                      RICK SCOTT, CHAIRMAN

    The Chairman. The U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging 
will now come to order. Across the country, older Americans are 
feeling that it is harder than ever to get timely access to the 
doctors and care they need to live happy, healthy lives and 
even when seniors do find a doctor, many feel rushed and 
disconnected from them.
    Doctors aren't the villains here. Like their patients, they 
are victims of a broken system. Doctors want to care for and 
connect with their patients, but our rigid, top-down health 
care system is making that job nearly impossible.
    This is especially true for doctors who see patients on 
Medicare or other government-run or subsidized health care 
programs. Federal mandates and administrative requirements pile 
on paperwork and paperwork, and force doctors to spend more and 
more time on compliance than on care, making patients face one 
obstacle after another just to get help. The results? Patients 
can't get the care they need from doctors, and doctors can't 
give patients the care they deserve.
    Actually, no one benefits from this. We are forcing our 
doctors to operate in a system that prioritizes paperwork over 
patients and federal mandates over professional judgment. The 
demands on doctors to focus on compliance over care are higher 
than ever. Doctors must navigate unstable insurance and 
Medicare policies, different reporting standards, and excessive 
administrative burdens just to take care of their patients.
    Again, no one benefits in this situation--not patients, and 
certainly not doctors who got into this profession because they 
want to help patients and the result is less care, less access, 
and worse outcomes.
    This is especially true in rural and underserved areas that 
already struggle to find and maintain health care providers, 
and the regulatory burden is especially tough for those who 
treat older Americans. It is no wonder that doctors regularly 
report feeling higher levels of burnout than other U.S. 
workers.
    That burnout leads to more doctors quitting their jobs, 
which creates more doctor shortages, which leads to increased 
administrative burden, which creates a more disconnection and 
fewer rewarding interactions with patients, which results in 
more burnout. In the most serious cases, this burnout 
contributes to devastating mental health consequences for 
physicians and their families, including serious depression and 
even suicide.
    We owe it to all of our constituents, but especially our 
aging population and those responsible for caring for them to 
stop this cycle. Today we will look at how Washington's 
regulations and red tape play into this crisis and what we can 
do to fix it so that our doctors can spend more time caring for 
patients and less time navigating bureaucracy.
    We will hear from witnesses who interact with physicians at 
all levels. They train our doctors, they manage them in medical 
practices, they treat them, and they work with them as 
colleagues and our doctors themselves. They will tell us about 
their real-life experiences navigating and preparing doctors 
that deal with Washington's top-down, one size fits all 
approach to regulated medicine.
    We will also share their experience working to solve these 
problems, what steps we can take to help our doctors and the 
patients they serve put the doctor-patient relationship back at 
the center of health care.
    I look forward to a productive discussion today with our 
witnesses, and I would like to recognize Ranking Member 
Gillibrand for her opening statement.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR 
             KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, RANKING MEMBER

    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Chairman Scott, for holding 
today's hearing. Thank you to our witnesses. I really 
appreciate you being here to give us your testimony. Burnout 
within the health workforce has decreased since its peak during 
the pandemic but remains a prevalent issue plaguing our systems 
of care. It directly impacts the well-being and effectiveness 
of our workforce, and its consequences are grave for the 
patients, particularly older adults and people living in rural 
or underserved areas.
    Burnout, which the American Medical Association defines as 
a long-term stress reaction including emotional exhaustion, 
depersonalization, and feeling of decreased personal 
achievement, causes physicians to leave the profession, making 
workforce shortages even worse and undermining access to care.
    A wide range of factors drive physician burnout, including 
regulatory and administrative requirements, system level 
financial pressures, and realities of the profession's culture. 
Regulatory requirements play an important role in upholding a 
quality standard for patient care, safety, and privacy.
    They allow providers to keep detailed track of patient 
treatment, and they also help prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. 
Simultaneously, it is clear that the current system has flaws. 
Requiring physicians to spend clinical time and energy fighting 
to convince insurance companies that their patient truly needs 
the procedure, treatment, or drug they prescribed is 
understandably aggravating and exhausting.
    Time payment adjustments to extensive patient data entry 
with technology designed for billing compliance instead of 
clinical workflow understandably causes fatigue and 
frustration, especially when it consistently spills beyond 
normal working hours.
    Reforms like streamlining the prior authorization process, 
approving the usability and interoperability of electronic 
health records, simplifying or standardizing payer forms would 
meaningfully reduce administrative burden that drives the 
burnout in physicians.
    This can help delay early exit from the workforce and keep 
independent practices afloat. This is especially important as 
we continue to see unprecedented rise in smaller physician 
owned practices closing their doors, integrating with larger 
health care systems, or receiving private equity investment.
    With these structural changes, physicians can face system 
level financial pressure that drive burnout through diminished 
agency and focus on profit. Under these circumstances, 
physicians can face business-oriented performance targets that 
require an increase in patient volume.
    This means seeing a greater number of patients in shorter 
increased, frequent visits that create even more administrative 
work, which can be compounded by the reduction of clinical and 
administrative support staff. This drive toward profit can 
undermine the ability of these vital health care workers to 
secure their basic psychological or safety needs, and they 
experience less autonomy and input on key decision-making.
    Particularly combined with the inability to practice 
elsewhere due to the rise of strict non-compete agreements, 
many physicians opt to leave the profession entirely. System 
leadership must drive operational level change.
    Employers have an obligation to meet the needs of their 
employees, promote participation in relevant decisions, and 
implement evidence informed actions like those included in the 
NIOSH and the Dr. Lorna Breen Foundation Impact Wellbeing 
Guide.
    Additionally, federal investigation into private equity 
investments in health care entities and federal action to ban 
anti-competitive terms in employment contracts are crucial to 
promoting autonomy at organizational and individual levels and 
reduce burnout. Despite the regulatory, administrative, and 
system level pressures that put enormous stress on the health 
workforce, there is a pervasive stigma against seeking mental 
health support and fear of medical license loss that prevents 
many from getting the help that they need.
    It is important that clinician education includes training 
to handle not only these administrative burdens, but also 
psychological preparation to handle trauma like a patient death 
or distress. We must address burnout. The consequences and 
stakes are too high. Healers are suffering. Providers are 
facing sky-high costs to replace each clinician that leaves.
    Remaining staff are working at reduced capacity, putting 
themselves and their patients at greater risk. Patients are 
losing access to the care they need. These impacts only 
intensify in older, rural, and underserved communities, 
especially combined with enacted cuts to Medicaid that will 
exacerbate the provider closures and create medical deserts. 
There isn't an easy solution to any of this.
    Moving the needle requires buy-in from all sectors that 
shape our workforce. Congress, academic institutions, 
regulators, and health system leaders must work together in a 
bipartisan way to create a system that supports, not exhaust, 
our essential workforce. I look forward to hearing from you and 
your proposals. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member. Now, I would like 
to welcome today is witnesses. Our first witness leads one of 
the Nation's most mission driven medical schools with a focus 
on training physicians to serve in rural communities.
    Dr. Alma Littles is the Dean and Chief Academic Officer of 
the Florida State University College of Medicine where she 
oversees medical education, workforce development, and 
physician training programs across the State of Florida.
    Under her leadership, the FSU College of Medicine has 
emphasized primary care, community-based training, and 
addressing physician shortages in areas most affected by access 
challenges. Half my office went to FSU, so they are excited 
that you are here, so please begin your testimony.

         STATEMENT OF ALMA LITTLES, M.D., DEAN & CHIEF

       ACADEMIC OFFICER, FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE

               OF MEDICINE, TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA

    Dr. Littles. Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Gillibrand, and 
distinguished Committee members, thank you for the opportunity 
to speak with you today to share a perspective on an issue that 
is becoming increasingly urgent across our Nation, physician 
burnout. An issue experienced by doctors who want nothing more 
than to care for their patients yet find themselves pushed to 
the brink by the very system meant to support them.
    Physicians enter medicine with a clear purpose, to heal, to 
serve, and to stand with patients in their most vulnerable 
moments but today, that purpose is being overshadowed by 
unsustainable administrative burdens leading to record 
percentages of physician burnout.
    We have already heard definitions of physician burnout, so 
I won't repeat that, but we know that physicians have a higher 
incidence of suicide when compared with other professionals in 
the United States. Around 400 take their lives each year and 
just as concerning, medical students and residents have rates 
of depression 15 percent to 30 percent higher than the general 
public.
    This is a national crisis. To address it, the National 
Academy of Medicine, the Association of American Medical 
Colleges, and the American Medical Association are all actively 
developing resources to help. Physicians are leaving medicine 
not because they have lost their passion, but because the 
regulatory environment has made it nearly impossible to 
practice the way they were trained.
    Physicians lose satisfaction when factors come between them 
and their patients. The issue is not regulation itself. 
Physicians understand the need for oversight, accountability, 
and patient safety. The issue the volume and complexity of 
mandates, documentation requirements, reporting systems, 
compliance checklists, and insurance rules and regulations that 
grow year after year in the face of reduced reimbursement and 
without regard for the time they consume or the strain they 
impose in the form of the inability to make decisions based on 
training.
    The consequences of burnout can be devastating. Think about 
this, one physician leaving practice potentially leaves 2,000 
to 3,000 patients without access to care. Studies suggest that 
more than half of practicing physicians say they are burned 
out. We found this to be a real issue in Florida after becoming 
aware of several suicides among medical students, residents, 
and faculty.
    Here is the hopeful part, this crisis is solvable. The 
medical schools in Florida came together to evaluate the 
support being to address the root causes of burnout. We use 
this data to share experiences and solutions. Programs were 
developed that support wellness activities and deliberate 
efforts were made to destigmatize seeking help in medical 
school, residency training, and practice.
    This included lobbying for a change in the licensure 
application regarding how questions about prior mental illness 
were asked and addressed. The survey of medical schools and 
residency programs confirmed that the schools were actively 
engaged in a variety of activities including incorporating 
mandatory wellness topics into the curriculum, providing 
dedicated onsite counseling services, offering online 
resources, hosting financial aid and planning workshops, and 
incorporating activities that prepare students for the impact 
of administrative burdens.
    Since our founding 25 years ago, Florida State University 
College of Medicine has recognized the threat of physician 
burnout and we hardwired into our curriculum and 
extracurricular activities, programs and activities to address 
it.
    We provide resources on sleep and stress management, weekly 
fitness classes, campus walks, and improved our onsite fitness 
room. A major suicide awareness and prevention program featured 
film screenings and a live panel discussion. Our six regional 
campuses also developed their wellness programs.
    All of this is helpful, but we cannot lose sight of key 
components of the American Medical Association's Physician 
Wellness Program that includes the reduction of administrative 
burdens, reduce of stress drivers in organizations, and removal 
of regulations and technology requirements.
    We need your help. You have the power to make a positive 
impact by supporting regulatory reform, promoting 
administrative simplification, ensuring that federal policies 
strengthen not strain the physician workforce, and by 
recognizing that the best way to protect patients is to protect 
the people who care for them.
    Addressing this issue is no longer an option. It is 
critical to ensuring access to care. I look forward to 
continuing the conversation. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Dr. Littles. Our next witness is a 
practicing family physician who left the traditional insurance 
driven system to restore the doctor-patient relationship. Dr. 
Lee Gross is the Founder of Epiphany Health Direct Primary Care 
in Florida, a national leader in the direct primary care 
movement.
    He spent more than two decades in private practice and has 
testified before Congress on how federal regulations and CMS 
mandates contribute to physician burnout and rising costs. 
Thank you for being here. Please begin your testimony.

        STATEMENT OF LEE GROSS, M.D., FOUNDER, EPIPHANY
        HEALTH DIRECT PRIMARY CARE, NORTH PORT, FLORIDA

    Dr. Gross. [Technical problems.] Sabotage the Florida guy.
    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, members of the Committee, it 
is a pleasure to be back here at the Senate to give some 
testimony. Again, my name is Lee Gross. I am a practicing 
family physician in Southwest Florida--have been independent 
since 2002.
    For disclosure, I serve on the Florida Board of Medicine. I 
am speaking on my own behalf and not on behalf of the Florida 
Board of Medicine, and I do not speak for the State of Florida. 
The name of my practice is Epiphany Health and Epiphany Health 
is a very strange name for a medical practice--and the timer is 
not running here. Epiphany Health is very strange for a very 
medical practice.
    In fact, we had an epiphany and the epiphany was, why are 
we insuring primary care? Why are we taking relational and 
longitudinal care and funneling that through an insurance 
product, using tens of thousands of diagnostic codes, hundreds 
of thousands diagnostic and billing codes, filing an insurance 
claim for every single transaction, and then we are 
disappointed and surprised that it is cumbersome, it is 
impersonal, it is inflexible, and it is expensive.
    I had a fully insured practice back in 2002. I took 
Medicare. I took all the insurances, and this was during the 
time of the sustainable growth rate formula and I would come to 
run up and down the halls of Congress saying, please don't cut 
our pay, please don't our pay. It is absolutely not survivable 
if Congress cuts the pay of primary care doctors.
    I would walk out, and behind me the ophthalmologist would 
walk in, and they would say, please, don't come our pay and 
then behind them, the surgeons were standing there and this 
constant battle for a larger slice of a pie that was 
continually shrinking. It just became obvious to me that we 
shouldn't be fighting for a large piece of the pie, but we 
should be looking to explode the pie and looking for a better 
way to do this.
    I was an early adopter of electronic health records, and I 
should say that in the sustainable growth rate debates, I would 
have to take out personal loans to make payroll because of the 
brinksmanship that would happen in Washington. I wouldn't know 
if we would have money coming in.
    I didn't know how to finance supplies. I didn't know how to 
finance equipment purchases because I didn't know what we were 
going to get paid and so, the Federal Government became an 
unreliable business partner in the practice of medicine, and I 
felt like I needed to fire them. I was an early adopter of 
electronic health records. I loved that electronic health 
record. It maximized operational flow, workflow.
    It was fantastic and then the Federal Governor came in and 
certified it and so, the electronic health record I had that 
did everything I needed it to do and made me more efficient was 
no longer certified, and they couldn't afford to certify.
    I started getting Medicare penalties because I had a system 
that was efficient and worked for my practice, but I was 
getting penalized, so I had to purchase an additional system 
that didn't do anything I needed to do.
    I had parallel systems, one for compliance and one actually 
to perform the function that I needed in my office. It 
essentially became that the electronic health record became a 
cash register. I used to get a one-page note from a consultant 
and I would know why my patient was there, what they did, what 
their recommendations were, what pertinent findings were.
    I get 16 pages of computer-generated rubbish, and I have no 
idea what the patient was there for, but I know their pet was 
spayed or neutered. It is absurd and so, the medical record has 
become a cash register, the patient has become an ATM, and it 
had become all about volume.
    You start rolling out all the alphabet soups of the MACRA 
and the MIPS, and the quality metrics, and the reporting. I 
would have to find other ways to generate revenue, because I 
wasn't going to do those things and so, every time I found a 
way to generate and support my practice, Medicare would make a 
rule change to undercut that and I was playing whack-a-mole 
with Medicare as to how my practice would survive.
    We kind of joked in my practice that we were just going to 
go ahead and stop billing Medicare. We are just going charge 
$100 for parking but effectively that is what we did. We 
created essentially in 2010 what became one of the first direct 
primary care practices in the country.
    We charge a subscription for services. We charge $93 a 
month right now for adults, $30 for children, and after that we 
charge nothing for the services we provide in our office. No 
copays, no deductibles. I don't bill insurance for any 
services. Any testing that I do in my office is included, EKGs, 
halter monitors, cortisone injections, those are all included 
and I have a cash-based relationship for all the services 
outside of my office.
    I buy everything wholesale and pass those savings along to 
the patient. I buy labs at 95 percent savings because the lab 
doesn't have to interact with the insurance company, and they 
don't have deal with coding and if you ask the lab, the most 
expensive thing that they do in the lab is interact with 
insurance companies and do the coding. If you eliminate all 
that and you just get the lab, it actually gets really cheap.
    We have been doing that now for 15 years, operating outside 
of insurance companies. We have seen nearly zero inflation in 
the actual cost of purchasing health care. The cost of coverage 
has skyrocketed, but our cost of purchasing care and providing 
care has been nearly flat for 15 years.
    Since we have started doing that, we were one of the first 
few practices in the country that have done that. Now, there 
are thousands of doctors around the country in all 50 States 
that have stepped away from the system because we can do better 
at providing primary care, not going through third-party 
systems.
    We are at a point now in our country where we can 
personalize health care down to somebody's individual DNA. We 
are taking a one size fits all approach to health care that has 
to be a broad brush across a massively enormous country that is 
so incredibly diverse as the United States of America.
    What we don't need is mass production in medicine. We need 
mass personalization, and that is the kind of care that we 
deliver, and I am hoping that we can get to that through 
removing some of the overregulation in health care. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you. Our next witness brings a 
perspective of managing large, multi-specialty physician groups 
serving both urban and rural communities. Jeffrey Smith is the 
Chief Executive Officer of Piedmont Healthcare in North 
Carolina and is the incoming Board Chair for the Medical Group 
Management Association.
    In his role, he oversees the operational, financial, and 
compliance challenges facing physician practices under Medicare 
and CMS regulation. Boy, it sounds like an easy job. Thank you 
for being here. Please begin your testimony.

      STATEMENT OF JEFFREY SMITH, CPA, MBA, FACMPE, CGMA,

             INCOMING BOARD CHAIR OF MEDICAL GROUP

              MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (MGMA), CHIEF

           EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PIEDMONT HEALTHCARE, PA

                  STATESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA

    Mr. Smith. Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Gillibrand, and 
members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 
testify on how administrative and regulatory red tape fuels 
physician burnout and undermines patient access to care.
    I am honored to speak on behalf of Medical Group Management 
Association, MGMA, as its incoming Board Chair. MGMA has over 
70,000 members across the United States representing 15,000 
medical group practices and more than 350,000 physicians.
    I am also the CEO of Piedmont Healthcare, a physician owned 
and led multi-specialty medical group based in Statesville, 
North Carolina, with over 230 physicians and providers and 
almost 1,200 employees.
    I have over 40 years of health care experience and I feel 
deeply passionate about this issue, in part because I have seen 
its impact firsthand while working alongside my daughter, who 
is a primary care physician in my practice. MGMA has long 
advocated for reducing administrative burden and routinely 
surveys our members on administrative hurdles they face.
    Their feedback makes clear the connection between 
regulatory burden, a broken payment system, and physician 
burnout. In our 2026 survey with over 230 responded physician 
practices, more than half of the practices report losing a 
physician to burn out in the past three years and among those, 
over 75 percent say regulatory burden played a substantial 
role.
    This impacts patient access to care as it leads to longer 
wait times, shorter visits, and practices becoming unable to 
accept new patients. In my own practice, I have increasingly 
witnessed more physicians being driven toward early retirement. 
Burden related to regulatory impacts, work-life balance as 
well, something I have seen with my daughter who often must 
complete these tasks at home after her children fall asleep.
    While MGMA supports efforts to strengthen and expand 
physician training programs, addressing administrative and 
regulatory policies that are leading to physician burnout is 
critical to stem the tide on the front end and support 
physicians already in practice. I would like to highlight the 
following burdens that I and other MGMA members are facing that 
significantly contribute to physician burnout.
    Medicare Advantage has allowed beneficiaries to access new 
benefits and can serve as an opportunity for innovation. 
However, as Medicare Advantage enrollment has increased, it has 
created daunting new challenges for many practices. MGMA 
members report audits, denials, prior authorization, and down-
coding in Medicare Advantage as some of their top burdens in 
2026.
    There is also significant lack of standardization across 
Medicare Advantage plans. We have had to hire whole teams 
dedicated to value-based care just to interpret what quality 
really means.
    For years, one of the top cited regulatory burdens for 
medical groups has been prior authorizations due to its impact 
on staffing demands, added cost, and impact on patient care. I 
oversee over 70 offices in the Charlotte metro area, and each 
practice has at least one staff member dedicated to prior 
authorizations.
    MGMA members rank Medicare Advantage as the most burdensome 
payer. I appreciate the Chairman, Ranking Member, and many 
members of the Committee for co-sponsoring the Improving 
Seniors Timely Access to Care Act. It is important to pass this 
widely supported legislation that would streamline prior 
authorization for Medicare Advantage.
    There are numerous additional opportunities to reduce 
duplicative and unnecessary regulatory hurdles. Reforming the 
Merit-Based Incentive Payment System, or MIPS, in Medicare 
would be welcomed. As complying with these requirements is a 
time-consuming and laborious process. Further, provider 
enrollment and credentialing in Medicare could be streamlined 
to better capture this data and lower practice costs.
    All of this regulatory red tape is exacerbated by the 
continued under-reimbursement of Medicare Part B. Financial 
stressors were the second largest contributing factor to 
physician burnout in our 2026 survey. Given Medicare's 
reimbursement's frequent reductions due to outdated budget 
neutrality requirements and lack of an inflationary update, it 
is vital to pass legislation to comprehensively address these 
concerns.
    The challenges discussed throughout this testimony coalesce 
to undermine the ability of independent medical groups to 
continue to operate and potentially lead many physicians to 
sell their practices. One MGMA member relayed selling their 
practice after being independent for over 100 years.
    Enacting long-term reforms would help lead to a more robust 
practice environment. I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to 
testify today and share both my personal experience and other 
MGMA members' experiences on how regulatory burden contributes 
to physician burnout. I look forward to your questions.
    The Chairman. Thank you. I now recognize Ranking Member 
Gillibrand to introduce the next witness.
    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I now want to 
introduce Corey Feist. Mr. Feist is the CEO and Co-Founder of 
the Dr. Lorna Breen Heroes Foundation and recently served as 
the CEO of the University of Virginia Physicians Group.
    Mr. Feist has previously testified to support mental health 
legislation for health care workers in front of the House 
Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health. His advocacy 
efforts resulted in the passage of the first federal law 
focused on improving the well-being of health care workers, Dr. 
Lorna Breen Health Care Provider and Protection Act, in honor 
of his sister-in-law.
    He was also awarded the Surgeon General's Medallion for 
Health in 2023 for the foundation's efforts. Mr. Feist, you can 
begin your testimony.

         STATEMENT OF COREY FEIST, JD, MBA, CO-FOUNDER

            AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, LORNA BREEN

         HEROES' FOUNDATION, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA

    Mr. Feist. Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Gillibrand, and 
members of this Committee, thank you. My name is Corey Feist, 
CEO of the Dr. Lorna Breen Heroes Foundation.
    On behalf of millions of health workers, thank you for the 
introduction and co-sponsorship of the Improving Seniors Timely 
Access to Care Act of 2025, and for reauthorizing the Dr. Lorna 
Breen Health Care Provider Protection Act. We now seek full 
funding of the Lorna Breen Act to ensure life-saving work 
continues. This is my third time testifying on this crisis.
    Each time I carry the stories of those lost, not to a lack 
of resilience, but to a system that failed them. In 2021, I 
shared the story of my sister-in-law, Dr. Lorna Breen. She was 
a physician leader during the pandemic's first wave in New York 
City. Despite her bravery, she was terrified that seeking 
mental health care for her trauma that she witnessed on the job 
would cost her career that she spent her life building.
    Lorna took her life April 26, 2020. In 2024, I shared the 
story of Tristan Kate Smith, a 28-year-old nurse whose father 
found a letter on her computer after her death. She wrote to 
the system she felt abused her, noting that instead of respect, 
they get pizza parties and pens for the health care heroes.
    Today, I share the story of Dr. William West, a 34-year-old 
ophthalmology resident. His family called him Iron Will for his 
tenacity in rock climbing and endurance racing. In March 2024, 
the information ocean and pressures of medical training broke 
even Iron Will. In a devastating final note he wrote, I am 
simply exhausted and have nothing more to give.
    He used his final moments to plead with administrators to 
support the residents rather than merely push them. William's 
story is a warning. Our health care system is claiming our 
brightest minds before they even finish their training. When we 
lose a resident, we aren't just losing one doctor.
    We are losing 40 years of expertise meant to serve our 
aging population. The tragedy of losing clinicians like Lorna, 
William, and Tristan is compounded by the looming demographic 
shift. The number of Americans over 60 will increase by 46 
percent in the next decade. HRSA projects will cause a shortage 
of over 500,000 nurses, physicians, dentists, and pharmacists 
by 2038.
    These projections do not fully account for those leaving 
due to systems failures, many of which you have already heard 
from. Forty-five percent of physicians say administrative 
pressures are pushing them toward career changes or early 
retirement. Administrative tasks like prior authorization are 
the number one. driver of physician burnout. Nurses face a 
safety crisis with 80 percent experiencing workplace violence. 
Last year, 24 percent of Gen Z nurses left their roles.
    Pharmacists are abandoning their roles due to excessively 
high workloads and hostile workplace climates. However, this is 
not a foregone conclusion. Thanks to the Lorna Breen Act funded 
Workplace Change Collaborative, we now have a proven national 
framework with several priorities for policy and practice to 
avert this crisis.
    The Lorna Breen Act grantees have already supported over 
250,000 health workers in states, and the results are 
undeniable with 35 percent reductions in staff turnover, 50 
percent decreases in mental health conditions. The law also 
supported NIOSH's Impact Wellbeing Initiative, which provided 
35,000 plus health care leaders with training to address the 
operational burdens that drive their workforce's burnout.
    Our foundation created a technical assistance program to 
accelerate the initiative. We improved access to mental health 
care for more than three million health workers by supporting 
over 70 licensing boards and over 20--or 2,000 hospitals and 
care facilities and removing intrusive mental health questions 
from licensing and credentialing applications. We are also 
proving that administrative burden can be reduced while job 
satisfaction and patient experience improve.
    One rural hospital decreased their workforce's cognitive 
burden addressing EHR alert fatigue. Their traveling nurses now 
want to stay in rural Virginia saying that this is the first 
place they have worked where they feel healthy, and they 
actually can get the help that they need. Reauthorization of 
the Lorna Breen Act is a historic win, but without funding, it 
is a hollow promise.
    While billions are spent on workforce creation, the Lorna 
Breen Act programs are the only ones directly supporting 
retention. Investment in the pipeline is squandered if we don't 
stop the leaks.
    For example, we currently face a two-year exodus in nurses, 
where 50 percent of new nurses leave the profession after two 
years.
    This Committee can make a difference by ensuring the Lorna 
Breen Act is fully funded in Fiscal Year 2027, and for voting 
for the Improving Seniors Timely Access to Care Act.
    I hope to return and report on the lives of health workers 
we have saved and how we are serving the aging community in the 
United States with the best and brightest among us, the Lornas, 
the Tristans, and the Williams. Thank you for your leadership.
    The Chairman. I thank each of you for your testimony, and I 
will turn it over to Senator Moody for the first questions.
    Senator Moody. Thank you, Chairman Scott, Ranking Member 
Gillibrand for holding this hearing, and welcome to two of our 
witnesses that are from Florida, for traveling up here and 
braving the ice on the ground. I know you wish you were back 
with the palm trees and flamingos. I do too. Welcome. This is 
such an important topic for our country, especially Florida. We 
have so many seniors in our state.
    Some refer to us as not just the Sunshine State, but the 
Silver State. Discussing how we are going to provide efficient, 
quality health care is so important and so, this topic is of 
great importance and particular interest to me. Florida has 
some of the best hospitals and providers in the country.
    We have world-renowned care, education, and training and we 
are so proud of these accomplishments, but we know they are 
only possible because we have hard working Floridians that have 
trained in health care and are part of our health care 
structure and show up to work, rain or shine, no matter what is 
happening.
    Nationwide, the health care industry employs over 17 
million people, making it one of the largest employment sectors 
in the United States, so it is understandable that we need a 
large health care sector and those that will work in this 
industry, but so much of that economy is tied up in billing, 
administration, and regulatory compliance and physicians are 
increasingly forced to spend nearly twice as much time on 
administrative work as they do in providing patient care.
    I hear from Floridians all the time what they are 
experiencing on the job in these health care careers, and it is 
grinding and it feels burdensome. It is challenging and I think 
that is probably why a recent Mayo Clinic study found that 57.1 
percent of physicians said they would choose to become a 
physician again, down from 72.2 percent just five years ago.
    With endless prior authorization requests, sometimes 
combative patients, extreme working hours, it is no wonder that 
many providers step away from their traditional practices to 
transition to direct primary care practices, also known as 
concierge care.
    Many of these practices allow physicians to see patients 
for longer, avoid cumbersome administrative processes, all 
while delivering a higher quality experience and giving doctors 
more time to live their lives.
    We expect that segment of the health care industry to grow 
to nearly $36 billion by 2030 and while there is a lot of good 
with that, and I certainly understand why there is that 
transition, we have to recognize that the exodus of providers 
from the mainstream health care system is a symptom of an 
underlying problem with that traditional system, and we as a 
Government have to figure out why that is.
    I mean, it is no longer a free market in the health care 
system. Government has gotten so involved and so regulated, and 
we require so many things. Some seem nonsensical, like making 
you move to a different computer system when yours is working 
just fine, where you have to maintain two computer systems.
    Unbelievably wasteful, and it sounds just like the 
Government but we are no longer a free market in our health 
care. I mean, supply and demand in health care is not driving 
costs anymore, and this is why we are seeing costs drive 
through the roof.
    This is why it is so taxing now on consumers of health 
care, and I don't blame this mass exodus of people trying to 
move into what health care used to be, providing care to 
patients in a way where you feel like you have a relationship 
with them, you can spend time with them, high quality, maybe 
even cost efficient.
    I am supportive of that but I am very nervous that 
concierge care or even direct care outside this, what we would 
now call the traditional health care or mainstream health care 
system, might not be accessible by everyday people who might 
not have a really, really high income. I worry about that.
    Obviously, as we are seeing this mass exodus from the 
profession in general, I think we are going to have a projected 
shortage of 140,000 physicians by 2038. We are seeing a mass 
exodus of physicians, period. We have a mass exodus going into 
this more direct or concierge care. I am really worried about 
what happens for everyday Americans that might not be able to 
afford that direct care.
    I think this is a great topic for us to talk about because 
I really think what has driven that is this just crazy, over-
regulated, nonsensical approach by Government to--and the more 
and more we become involved in health care, the more and more 
complex and out of control, and chaotic, and unmanageable, not 
working for physicians, not working consumers, it becomes.
    Dr. Gross, thank you for being with us. Congratulations on 
a successful career. I wanted to ask you how--you know, 
congratulations on all that you have been able to do to 
navigate around what we in government have created in the 
traditional health care system, but what would be your 
recommendations to--from where we find ourselves with a rapidly 
declining physician population, and out of that, add to it 
those moving out of a health care system that is more 
traditional, that many use government services or government 
assistance to access.
    What would be your recommendations for those of us on this 
Committee to make sure that health care is not only quality, 
but cost efficient for Americans?
    Dr. Gross. Thank you, Mr. Chair. A lot to unpack in the 
statements there. I think one of the first things that I would 
like to do is just clarify a little bit between concierge 
medicine and direct primary care, because concierge medicine 
typically does charge an access fee and then bills a fee for 
service to a third-party payer, whereas the direct primary car 
charges a subscription fee, and everything is included in that, 
so there is a difference in the price points.
    Senator Moody. Different in the way you charge.
    Dr. Gross. Different in the way you charge and different in 
what is included, so we don't bill--it is not like a fast pass 
at Disney World, where you pay for access. You know, that is 
more of a concierge model.
    Moving past that, I would say that a physician that leaves 
practice because they are overburdened, and they have moral 
injury sees precisely zero patients, so if you are forcing 
somebody out of practice because of the complexities of it, 
then you are not comparing it to a doctor that would see 3,000 
patients and now they are shrinking it.
    You are comparing it to a doctor that would see zero 
patients, so it is not an actual fair comparison, because I 
would not be practicing medicine today if I did not change my 
practice model. I just wouldn't have done it.
    I would have found something else to do. I am forced by law 
to opt out of Medicare when I direct contract with these 
patients. That was not my decision. That was federal law that 
required----
    The Chairman. Explain that--that you can't do both.
    Dr. Gross. Right. When I directly contract with a Medicare 
beneficiary for services that are covered by Medicare, I have 
to, by law, opt out. It is not just opt out in my direct care 
practice. It is across the board, under everything tied to my 
NPI. I can't moonlight as a hospitalist. I can't serve ER 
shifts. I can't do telemedicine through a traditional teledoc 
type service, because they all bill Medicare.
    That locks me into saying, I can only accomplish this panel 
size by statute. I would love to see that change. I want to 
work with you to change that statute, because that has a 
disproportional impact on rural health care.
    Because if I am putting a panel of a primary care doctor in 
rural America, in rural Alaska, rural Utah, I can make a direct 
primary care practice work and be profitable with 300 to 500 
patients. I can't do that with a fee-for-service practice. If I 
come in with 300 to 500 patients, I am going to need massive 
federal subsidies.
    I am going to need something to keep that practice afloat, 
and there is no way you are going to be able to do it, so and 
again, if statute requires me to opt out to do that--I may be 
the only doctor in your community serving in your emergency 
room.
    I may the only that might be able to care for you in the 
hospital, and statute has required me to opt out because I am 
providing more affordable and accessible care. It is important 
to, again, to have the maximum flexibility for physicians to 
shift to the needs of their community directly and not have 
that federally dictated.
    For example, when we went into COVID, it took three months 
for Medicare to recognize the invention of the telephone, and 
we are still fighting over whether the telephone is appropriate 
access for physicians and whether the Federal Government should 
pay for it.
    Just as recently as two weeks ago we are trying to decide 
this. I shifted my practice to a telemedicine on day number 
one. When you mentioned the rains falling, when Hurricane Ian 
tore the roof off the emergency room next to my office, I 
didn't need to wait for the insurance companies to convene a 
new code for me to provide parking lot care for my services. I 
put a tent in the front of my building.
    We opened up to all comers, whether they were our patients 
or not. We provided free care to the community. Why? Because I 
am getting paid. I am being paid on a subscription basis and I 
have the flexibility and ability to provide the services to the 
care, to my community that they need.
    Senator Moody. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you. Ranking Member Gillibrand.
    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Feist, in 
your testimony, you discussed how administrative burden is an 
underlying cause of physician burnout, impacting time with 
patients and pushing doctors beyond even extended working 
hours.
    Your foundations, Impact Wellbeing Guide, provides guidance 
on how hospitals and health systems can address these burdens 
through quality improvement projects. Could you please share a 
brief example of how health care providers successfully reduce 
physician burnout by using your Impact Wellbeing Guide.
    Mr. Feist. Absolutely. The Lorna Breen Act created the 
Impact Wellbeing Guide, and NIOSH partnered with our foundation 
and our all-in national coalition of over 37 of the largest 
professional associations to create this leader retraining 
guide.
    What we have done is we have implemented this guide across 
the United States, particularly in Virginia, North Carolina, 
now in New Jersey, and as well as in Wisconsin and, what we saw 
in Virginia after doing this were decreases in the amount of 
time that clinicians were spending in the electronic medical 
record before and after work by significant numbers.
    In some cases, three to five minutes per patient, in some 
cases ten to fifteen minutes per patients. Huge decreases 
there. In addition, standing orders for pharmacy refills. 
Things that keep the pharmacists, the patients, as well as the 
physicians burdened with bureaucracy. All of those things, 
using the Impact Wellbeing Guide, decreased the amount of time 
that folks were spending outside of direct patient care, 
increased their well-being, increased--and decreased their 
burnout
    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you. Dr. Smith, your testimony 
describes how Medicare Advantage's burdensome prior 
authorization requirements significantly contribute to 
physician burnout and can harm patients.
    Over 60 Senators, including myself, are pushing to pass the 
Improving Seniors Timely Access to Care Act to streamline the 
prior authorization process and help address some of these 
widespread concerns.
    Yet, CMS's new Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction 
model, also known as the WISeR model, expands prior 
authorization into traditional Medicare and utilizes a new non-
standardized approach that is inconsistent with the existing 
federal regulations. How will the WISeR model increase 
administrative and patient burdens in traditional Medicare, and 
how might this drive burnout among physicians in states where 
this model is enacted?
    Mr. Smith. I think what you are going to see is more prior 
authorizations needed. That is going to add burden to the 
staff.
    There will be more denials that will add burden to the 
physician to either fight the denial or just to decide it is 
just not worth the fight. Now, you have patients not receiving 
care. If patients don't receive care, I believe that they will 
get sicker, they will end up in the emergency room, and 
ultimately the hospital, which will drive the cost of health 
care up.
    My dad is 94. He went to the doctor this week while I was 
up in Philadelphia visiting him, and the doctor decided that he 
needed a CAT scan. I would bet a lot of money that that would 
be denied if you did a prior-auth on that.
    Senator Gillibrand. Right.
    Mr. Smith. You know, we spend a lot of time telling 
doctors, you know, you are in charge, you are the quarterback 
of care. We actually increased the E&M codes, but every step of 
the way we question what they do. I think we would just be 
contributing to the burnout of doctors if we move forward with 
it.
    Senator Gillibrand. I agree. Dr. Gross and Dr. Littles. Dr. 
Gross, in your testimony, you highlight the mismatch between 
how physicians are trained and the regulatory environment that 
they practice in.
    You say that when physicians enter the workforce, they are 
clinically competent but structurally unprepared to operate 
smaller rural practices. How does this mismatch drive physician 
burnout and contribute to consolidation?
    Dr. Gross. One of the things that I have noted is that when 
people are graduating from training--I am kind of old school. 
When I went into training, I had full practice management 
training in my practice.
    That doesn't really happen to a degree. I mean, it is still 
sort of required. When people graduate, they do not have the 
full practice manager. How do you have compliance? How do you 
comply with OSHA? How do you hire? How do you fire? How do you 
set up your structure? How do you negotiate contracts?
    That is all stuff that I learned in my training, but it is 
not really being taught to that degree. Because most people are 
being trained to be employees in an outpatient and ambulatory 
setting.
    If you are trying to then go from training into a rural 
health care setting delivery where you need to be running your 
own practice, they are not prepared for that. People are just 
not even stepping into that environment, and it is leaving a 
huge void in the rural communities.
    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you. Dr. Littles, in your 
testimony, you shared how medical schools and residency 
programs in Florida recognize this mismatch and are 
incorporating activities to help students prepare for the 
impact of the profession's administrative burdens. Please 
describe some of these initiatives and discuss how medical 
students and trainees have responded to these trainings.
    Dr. Littles. Sure. We all know that medical school is a 
stressful environment, going through the process of training to 
become a physician, so we put in support systems, you know, for 
students to help guide them through this because we recognize 
that they are going to be facing stressful situations 
throughout their career, so having, you know, access to onsite 
counseling that they can, you know, access right there at the 
college without feeling that, you know, tension of is this 
going to affect my licensure later on and prohibit me from 
being licensed or practicing medicine, so activities like that.
    Having wellness activities so that they learn to take 
breaks because at the end of the day we are all humans before 
we are physicians and they need to be able to, you know, to 
take breaks, make sure that they are, you know, eating 
properly, and getting rest, and maintaining connections to 
their support systems that they had even before they came, you 
know, to medical school.
    Training them with those activities but also recognizing 
that these other stressors that they are going to face as 
practicing physicians are there as well and so, having them 
actually training with those physicians--I mean our students 
and our residents get to see what our attending physicians are 
facing in their practices.
    When they are having to deal with these issues like, you 
know, prior authorization and denials, and you know, patients 
not being able to access the appropriate lab or the 
appropriate, you know, X-ray facility, they are seeing this as 
a part of their training, even in medical school.
    As Dr. Gross said, those requirements for that practice 
management training is there for our resident physicians, but a 
lot of them are not focusing on it. Certainly not early on in 
their residencies they are not focusing on it because they are 
not having to be the ones ultimately responsible for it.
    As they get closer to graduation, they tend to start paying 
a little bit more attention to it but it is true that more 
physicians are employed today than even, you know, 10 years ago 
and certainly more than, you know, 20, 25 years ago. More and 
more of them are entering employed situations which in many 
cases exacerbates a lot of these issues we are talking about.
    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Senator Warnock.
    Senator Warnock. Thank you Chair Scott and Ranking Member 
Gillibrand. Communities in my state and all across the country 
face dire physician shortages as this panel has demonstrated.
    Estimates are that in just a couple years we will be short 
by tens of thousands of doctors. Mr. Feist, what effect will 
additional workforce shortages have on our current health 
professionals many of whom are already facing?
    Mr. Feist. Reduction in staff are a force multiplier on the 
issues that we have been talking about on this Committee today. 
We have to look at what our clinicians are spending their time 
doing right now.
    When you look at the fact that about 70 percent of a 
primary care physician's time and 50 percent of a nurse's time 
is spent away from the bedside, away from a patient, spending 
that time on administrative burden--as you decrease your staff, 
who else is left to do the administrative work? It is this 
vicious cycle that will impact access. It will impact quality. 
It will affect cost over time.
    Senator Warnock. It is an impact, obviously, on the 
workers, including the physicians and their workplace, but it 
is a real effect on patients----
    Mr. Feist. Absolutely.
    Senator Warnock [continuing]. and the quality of the health 
care that they are able to provide. For decades, Medicaid has 
helped fund doctor residency training through the Graduate 
Medical Education, or GME, Program.
    This program has played a critical role in addressing 
physician shortages in states like Georgia, where more than 2.7 
million Georgians live in a health professional shortage area. 
It is clear we need to do more.
    That is why I was proud to introduce the bipartisan 
Resident Physician Shortage Reduction Act alongside my friend 
Senator Boozman. This bill would fund 14,000 new resident slots 
over the next seven years.
    Mr. Smith, how would you increase--how would an increase in 
Medicare-funded graduate medical education slots help improve 
our seniors' access to health care services?
    Mr. Smith. I think any physician--any addition of 
physicians into the market would increase access to care. There 
would be more appointment time and more availability.
    The challenge we have is convincing those doctors to go 
into primary care and internal medicine. Most of them, 
nowadays, they say, you know, become a neurosurgeon, or you 
know, I want to become an EP doc in cardiology, because there 
is more money there.
    They are trying to pay off their student debts. They spend 
another year in fellowship. We don't see a significant amount 
of docs wanting to be family practice doctors anymore. I think 
somehow we have got to incentivize that in this program to make 
that more attractive, and the noble position that it used to 
hold in the community.
    Take some of this administrative burden off of them and let 
them be doctors again. The numbers are great. We need the 
numbers. We know that the shortage by 38 is going to be 
staggering. I think the bill is----
    Senator Warnock. They are making decisions then about the 
direction of their career and what they will be able to 
practice, not necessarily based on what they prefer to do. Some 
would love to go into primary care. It is an economic issue.
    In that regard, Dr. Littles, in your experience, how often 
does the cost of higher education in the health professions 
dissuade people from entering the field?
    Dr. Littles. Thank you for that question. We certainly 
believe that that is a factor. Because as I said, when students 
come into medical school, they come because they really want to 
be able to provide care and spend that time, you know, with 
their patients but they also need to be to make a living in 
doing that.
    As has been said, it is the primary care specialties that 
are the hardest hit with that because they tend to be at the 
lower end of the pay scale already and if you are asking them 
to do more and more for less and less, at some point that just 
doesn't work, you know, for them.
    If we are able to fix some of these other issues with those 
practices, I believe those students who come in wanting to take 
care of patients in a primary care setting will continue to 
want to do that and we will continue to do that.
    Senator Warnock. Absolutely. I would imagine--well, not 
imagine. I know this is particularly difficult for first 
generation college students who have gone on to medical school 
and are--you know, they have the aptitude, but you have these 
barriers.
    In the last few months, I have heard from thousands of 
Georgians about changes to federal loan limits under the big 
ugly bill, which capped the maximum amount of federal direct 
loans available to students pursuing a health profession. Most 
medical and nursing students in Georgia rely on federal loans 
to afford their education and when federal loans are capped, 
students seeking advanced degrees in health care still owe the 
rest of their bill.
    Those who don't come from rich families have to then try 
and get risky private loans from banks, or worse, put their 
tuition balance on high-interest credit cards, or even just 
give up their dreams of being a health professional altogether.
    This is a concern that all of us share. I appreciate your 
work in this area, Dr. Littles, and also other members of the 
panel. I am deeply concerned that these changes to the federal 
student loans amid a growing health care workforce shortage and 
aging population is the exact wrong move at the exact long 
time. Thank you so much.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Warnock. Senator 
Alsobrooks.
    Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you so much, Chair Scott, Ranking 
Member Gillibrand, and thank you so much as well to all of our 
witnesses for being here today. Across the country and in 
communities throughout Maryland, physicians are telling us the 
same story.
    We hear that they are exhausted, overwhelmed, and 
increasingly unsure how long they can continue practicing in a 
system that demands more from them each year, while giving them 
less time, less support, and less autonomy to focus on patient 
care.
    You know, I had a medical appointment just last week and 
had that experience. The doctor came in, collapsed basically on 
the chair and said, you know, I don't know what we are doing 
here. You know, one patient after the next.
    Burnout is not simply about long hours. It is about 
physicians spending more and more of their time navigating 
layers of paperwork and trying to operate around complicated 
processes instead of caring for patients. It is shorter visits, 
heavier caseloads, and constant pressure to do more with less.
    It is about working in environments where asking for help 
can still feel risky or discouraged. In Maryland, I hear from 
providers who want nothing more than to stay in their community 
and care for their patients, but who are struggling under 
administrative complexity, rising operating costs, and 
workplace structures that prioritize volume over quantity.
    These pressures are driving talented physicians out of 
medicine, and patients are feeling the consequences. 
Appointments are hard to get, wait times are longer, and rural 
and underserved communities are losing providers altogether and 
exhausted clinicians face higher risks of medical error, 
directly affecting patient safety. This is not just a workforce 
issue.
    It is a health care issue as well, an access issue. It is 
the quality of care and system sustainability issue. At the 
same time, the drastic Medicaid cuts in H.R. 1 threaten to 
further destabilize clinics and hospitals that serve as the 
backbone of primary and preventative care, forcing more 
patients into emergency rooms while placing even greater strain 
on an already stretched workforce.
    We cannot afford to continue operating a health care system 
that is burning out the very professionals that we depend on. 
Now, I have a question, Mr. Feist, if I can start with you and 
you have spent years working with hospitals, health care 
systems, and policymakers on efforts like Dr. Lorna Breen 
Health Care Provider Protection Act to address physician mental 
health and burnout.
    Much of the national conversation focuses on helping 
physicians manage stress, but far less on reforming the 
structural conditions that drive burnout in the first place, so 
based on your work, can you tell us what are the most impactful 
preventative reforms that reduce burnout at its root?
    Mr. Feist. I appreciate the question because you highlight 
the issue. The well-intended response over the last few years 
to the workforce has been to flood the market with a message of 
you need to be more resilient to health workers, when they need 
the problems addressed at the root cause.
    What we hear from the workforce by asking them the same 
question you asked me is that the administrative burden is the 
number one driver of their burnout. In addition, for nurses, 
the increasing issues around safety and threats and acts of 
violence against them are also driving them completely out of 
the workforce.
    The workloads are manageable if you think about the fact 
that if you--I am sorry, the workloads can be manageable if you 
reduce the amount of administrative time that they are spending 
before and after work.
    That in getting health workers back to the bedside and back 
to getting into the direct patient care that they went into the 
business to do, so we need to return them back to what they 
trained for and eliminate as much of the administrative burden 
and other operational inefficiencies that stand between them 
and their patients every day.
    Senator Alsobrooks. As to workforce violence, I have heard 
a lot about workforce violence. How important is it that 
occupational safety and health administration develop clear 
federal standards to ensure that physicians, nurses, and other 
health care professionals can practice in environments that are 
physically safe, as well as adequately supported?
    Mr. Feist. A question back to me?
    Senator Alsobrooks. Yes.
    Mr. Feist. I think about the Maslow hierarchy of needs. You 
have your essential needs of being able to be fed and watered, 
if you will, use the restroom but then right above that, you 
have safety and feelings of just being physically safe and 
emotionally safe. It is critically important for our workforce.
    I mean, we don't walk in here every day without armed 
guards outside and yet, we send our health workers into an 
environment where they can be physically and verbally abused 
every day, and then we ask them to come back tomorrow and do it 
all over again. It is just an unsustainable environment for 
them to work in.
    Senator Alsobrooks. One last question. My time is going 
here. Prior authorization, and this is for Mr. Smith, has 
become a routine gatekeeper in medical care, often requiring 
extensive paperwork, repeated appeals, and long delays before 
patients can receive treatment that their physicians deem 
medically necessary.
    From your perspective running medical practices, how does 
the current prior authorization system contribute to physician 
burnout? What consequences do you see for patients when 
medically necessary care is delayed or denied, particularly for 
older adults and those in rural and underserved communities?
    Mr. Smith. Yes, thank you. Prior authorizations are 
delaying care. There is no doubt about it and just to back up 
for a second, burnout is not restricted to doctors. In some of 
our offices, we have over 40 percent of our staff turnover 
every year because they cannot last in this environment. It is 
that difficult.
    I try to see every class of incoming employees and I tell 
them, health care is not for the faint of heart. It is 
incredibly difficult, and I believe our front desk folks have 
the toughest job in health care. Not the doctors. It is the 
front desk. They need to be psychiatrists, insurance experts, 
best friends. I mean, it is incredibly challenging, all working 
under HIPAA obviously.
    Prior authorization slows care. We see that, forcing folks 
to go to urgent care, in a lot of cases to the emergency room, 
because we haven't been able to get the authorization. We see 
delays in care. We haven't been able to quantify what that 
means in terms of additional dollars, but I think that would be 
worth looking at because I think that slowdown--we keep saying 
we need to get rid of the administrative burden, but we also 
recognize that the Government doesn't have unlimited money.
    How do we work together to reduce those burdens so it 
reduces our costs, so we may not need as much of an increase as 
we had thought we did because now we can get rid some staff or 
rearrange some staff.
    We can back to taking care of patients, because that is 
really--that is what doctors want to do. That is why they went 
to medical school. I believe that prior-auths are our biggest 
issue and truly need to be addressed quickly.
    Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Alsobrooks. Dr. Littles, 
what effect does documentation reporting requirements have on 
the willingness of new physicians to practice in rural or 
underserved areas?
    Dr. Littles. Thank you. We have been talking about the 
stressor of dealing with the electronic health records and the 
number of electronic health record that physicians often have 
to go through in the course of taking care of their patients.
    When you extend that out into rural communities, oftentimes 
even access to an electronic, you know, health record in and of 
itself--one, it is costly, but sometimes that is difficult for 
them to even have.
    When they have that electronic health record, we know that, 
you know, the number of clicks that they have to go through to 
provide the documentation is directly related to the stress 
that they feel from that.
    When you are asking about how the documentation 
specifically is affecting students wanting to go into rural 
practice, among the whole list of other factors that prevent 
them from doing that, that is certainly one of them.
    The cost of the electronic health record, the complexity of 
using the electronic health record. The fact that the 
electronic health record isn't communicating with the 
physicians they are referring patients to in nearby urban 
areas.
    All of that has a negative impact. I hear my faculty 
talking all the time about the pajama time that they are 
spending on their electronic health record, which has also been 
mentioned today. All of those are distractions from the care of 
the patient.
    The Chairman. Thank you. Dr. Gross, tell me how your 
practice changed. How is your day different now from when you 
are running an insurance driven practice to a patient driven 
practice?
    Dr. Gross. Yes. When I have a fee for service practice, any 
slot in my schedule when I walk into my office that is not 
already filled is lost revenue, so when I walk in, the schedule 
is already full.
    As the phones start to ring, then I have to start adding 
double booking, triple booking, quadruple booking, referring to 
the emergency room, sending to physician assistants, nurse 
practitioners, sending to other sites of care, because I don't 
have the capacity built within my schedule to accommodate for 
them. Which requires me to run an hour behind schedule, two 
hours behind schedule.
    Five minute office visits, three minutes of those which are 
spent clicking the boxes to get paid and then the two-minutes, 
oh, you have got another problem. I am sorry, you got to 
rebook, and by the way, my next available appointment is in 
three months. My schedule that I have right now is I walk into 
my office, I have an hour before lunch blocked out for same day 
appointments an hour before lunch, at the end of my day blocked 
out for same-day appointments. As the phone rings, if you call 
me in the morning, you are seen in the warning. As you call in 
the afternoon, you are seen in the afternoon.
    If I don't get a phone call, then I do administrative time, 
or I go home and spend some time with my family but people 
aren't referred to the emergency room simply because I am too 
busy and that opens up my schedule to actually practice to the 
full scope of my training.
    I would argue that a lot of referrals in primary care is 
not because the doctor is not capable of handling the problem. 
It is because the doctor doesn't have time to handle the 
problem, so when the doctor now has the time and the 
administrative burden is lifted to perform the full scope of 
his or her practice, now you are stopping downstream referrals 
for endocrinology, for rheumatology.
    You are managing things within your practice that are 
clearly within your purview as you are training and we see that 
in our data. That when we implement this into a health plan 
that is built around our practice model, our ER referrals are 
35 percent less. Our specialty referrals are 35 percent less.
    Our cost of total implementation of the health plan built 
around our model is a 52 percent reduction in health care in a 
rural health care setting and we sustain numbers like that over 
seven years because we are--not because we are better than 
anyone.
    It is the structural design of the practice. It is the 
administrative design of the practice, the intent of that, 
which I think is completely changing how we care for patients.
    The Chairman. Mr. Smith, how much of your budget goes to 
getting prior authorizations, compliance, paperwork versus 
patient care?
    Mr. Smith. Well that is a good question. I don't have a 
specific answer. I can tell you that in 75 offices, we have at 
least one employee, average employee, with benefits is making 
$35,000 to $50,000, so it is a significant amount and if we 
could reduce that by a quarter, by a half, it would 
significantly change the budget of the medical group.
    The Chairman. Is it easy to stay up with all the changes by 
the insurance companies and by Medicare and by Medicaid?
    Mr. Smith. I am sorry. Say that--?
    The Chairman. Is it easier to stay with all of the rule 
changes by Medicare, Medicaid, plus all the changes with the 
insurance company?
    Mr. Smith. It is not easy. I mean we do our best to 
educate. We have great staff. You know, our staff typically is 
high school educated. Working in the medical offices, we have 
in-house programs to allow them to become certified medical 
assistants.
    We do everything we can to raise them up and to increase 
their knowledge, but it is a lot. You know, a one or two doctor 
practice, can't really have a business manager running that 
practice, so we are running it from afar and hoping that we can 
get information to them to allow them to be successful. 
Honestly, just to get paid for the work they are doing.
    The Chairman. The people who run Medicare and Medicaid in 
your state, they are just out there to help you every day, 
aren't they?
    Mr. Smith. Yes, every day they come out. [Laughter.] No. It 
is a challenge.
    The Chairman. Mr. Feist, how much of today's mental health 
crisis is driven not by patient care itself but by the constant 
pressure of bureaucracy and red tape?
    Mr. Feist. We hear--as we have discussed today, when you 
think about burnout as an occupational syndrome and burnout as 
driven by the workplace design, I think as we discussed today 
the vast majority of what we are experiencing in burnout is 
within our control to reduce by changing the operational 
environment that our health care workers work in every single 
day.
    The Chairman. Well, I want to thank everybody for being 
here today. This was eye opening and hope all of our colleagues 
in the Senate see all this.
    I think it is very difficult what physicians are going 
through and I think more and more physicians are doing what you 
are doing, Dr. Gross. They have got to opt out of the way the 
system is organized because it is just too difficult.
    I am sure you deal with, Dr. Littles, all the time with, 
you know, the choices people are making, so thanks everybody 
for being here. It is clear that real reforms must start with 
cutting red tape and putting doctor-patient relationships at 
the center of health care so physicians can focus on healing 
rather than compliance.
    I look forward to continuing to work with members across 
the aisle and down the dais. If any Senators have additional 
questions for the witnesses or statements to be added, the 
hearing record will be open until next Wednesday at 5:00 p.m. 
Thank you very much. It is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 04:45 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]


      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
=======================================================================


                                APPENDIX

=======================================================================




      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
=======================================================================


                      Prepared Witness Statements

=======================================================================





      

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Prepared Witness Statement

                            Dr. Alma Littles
                            
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Prepared Witness Statement

                             Dr. Lee Gross
                             
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Prepared Witness Statement

                             Jeffrey Smith
                             
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Prepared Witness Statement

                              Corey Feist
                              
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
=======================================================================


                        Questions for the Record

=======================================================================




      

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                        Questions for the Record

                            Dr. Alma Littles

                          Chairman Rick Scott

    Question:

    You highlighted during the hearing that even modest 
reductions in documentation and administrative workload can 
meaningfully increase patient-facing time and reduce burnout. 
For small, independent, or rural practices that lack large IT 
departments, what types of digital infrastructure or workflow-
support platforms are most practical and scalable to eliminate 
redundant documentation, streamline prior authorization, and 
improve care coordination?

    Response:

    For small, independent, or rural practices, the most 
practical approaches are hub and spoke digital infrastructure 
models, where core clinical and administrative capabilities are 
provided through a regional or system-level platform (Health 
System or State Entity), rather than requiring each practice to 
maintain its own IT department.

Examples of practical platforms include:

      Shared EHR instances or hosted environments (e.g., a 
regional Epic or Cerner/Oracle deployment) that allows rural 
practices and hospitals to plug into enterprise-grade 
documentation, ordering, and care coordination workflows 
without bearing full implementation or maintenance costs.
      Embedded workflow automation layers within those 
Electronic Health Records (EHR), such as native AI, 
standardized prior authorization modules, centralized referral 
management, and system-level clinical documentation templates, 
that eliminate duplicative charting and manual handoffs.
      Cloud-based care coordination and interoperability tools 
that leverage TEFCA (Trusted Exchange Framework and Common 
AgreementT) and FHIR (Fast Healthcare Interoperability 
Resourcesr) standards to ensure patient information flows 
seamlessly across sites in a regional network.

Sample incentives to support this model:

      Federal grants or enhanced matching funds for shared EHR 
hosting arrangements between larger health systems and rural or 
independent practices.
      CMS recognition of regional digital health hubs (e.g., 
"Certified Rural Integration Platforms") that meet 
interoperability, uptime, and governance standards.
      Reduced reporting or documentation requirements for 
practices that participate in an approved shared infrastructure 
model.

Payer Integration Incentive:

      Provide enhanced reimbursement rates, administrative 
cost-sharing, or preferred network status for payers that 
integrate directly into shared EHR platforms (e.g., Epic's 
Payer Platform) used by regional hubs and rural spokes, 
allowing real-time eligibility, authorization, care gap 
closure, and quality reporting. This reduces payer 
administrative overhead, improves risk adjustment accuracy, and 
lowers avoidable utilization through shared clinical 
visibility.

    Question:

    What federal policy changes would most accelerate adoption 
of such solutions while maintaining appropriate safeguards for 
patient privacy and program integrity?

    Response:

Reward integration rather than fragmentation. Examples of 
policy changes:
      Clarifying regulatory safe harbors under Stark, Anti-
Kickback, and Civil Monetary Penalty rules to explicitly allow 
health systems to subsidize or host digital infrastructure for 
affiliated rural or independent practices, provided 
interoperability and patient choice standards are met.
      Standardizing privacy and governance frameworks for 
shared EHR and data platforms, so smaller practices are not 
forced to independently interpret HIPAA, state privacy laws, or 
cybersecurity requirements.
      Aligning federal quality and reporting programs (e.g., 
MIPS, Promoting Interoperability) so participation through a 
shared platform satisfies compliance requirements, instead of 
duplicating reporting at each site.

Sample incentives:

      A federal "integration bonus" applied to Medicare 
reimbursement for practices participating in validated regional 
digital infrastructure arrangements.
      Preferential eligibility for CMS innovation models or 
rural health demonstrations for systems that demonstrate multi-
site EHR integration and shared workflows across urban and 
rural settings.
      Liability and audit protections for practices using 
federally recognized shared platforms that meet predefined 
security and integrity benchmarks.

Policy Safe Harbor for Payer Participation:

      Establish explicit federal safe harbors and 
demonstration authority allowing payers to co-invest in shared 
clinical and administrative infrastructure, such as hosted 
EHRs, payer-provider data platforms, or integrated utilization 
management tools, when tied to measurable reductions in 
administrative burden, duplicative services, and total cost of 
care, while maintaining strict governance and patient consent 
standards.

    Question:

    Additionally, how should federal payment or demonstration 
programs be structured to incentivize adoption of workflow-
enhancing digital tools, including AI-enabled documentation, 
coding, or administrative support platforms that measurably 
reduce clinician time spent on non-clinical tasks?

    Response:

    One thing to consider with any demonstration program is 
whether or not small physician practices will be able to 
successfully participate. Physicians in small practices and 
those in rural areas spend inordinate amounts of time just 
requesting and waiting for patient records to reach them. 
Access to patient care documents from consulting physicians 
enhances efficiency and quality of care. Having systems that 
fully integrate between hospitals, consulting physician 
practices and primary care physician practices is critical. For 
that to happen, small practices will need to be able to receive 
adequate funding and support without the fear of costly 
recoupments or excessive program penalties. While costs are a 
crucial and necessary consideration for the government, if 
small practices are not equipped with the resources they need 
to acquire the software and potentially hardware needed, the 
demonstration may be effectively limited to larger hospital 
systems while excluding many smaller practices that could 
benefit the most from measures aimed at reducing administrative 
burdens.

Effective program design should move beyond merely "checking 
the box":

      Tie incentives to outcomes, such as reductions in 
clinician documentation time per visit, faster prior 
authorization turnaround, or increased patient-facing minutes, 
rather than simply purchasing the technology.
      Encourage system-level deployment of AI-enabled tools 
(e.g., ambient documentation, automated coding, centralized 
prior authorization engines) that benefit multiple sites 
simultaneously.
      Allow savings from administrative efficiency to be 
shared between clinicians, practices, and hosting systems, 
reinforcing alignment.

Sample incentive structures:

      CMS demonstration programs that provide per-clinician or 
per-visit bonuses when validated AI or automation tools reduce 
time spent on documentation, coding, or administrative tasks.
      Shared-savings models where reductions in administrative 
cost or denied claims are partially returned to participating 
practices and hosting health systems.
      Temporary expense recognition or add-on payments for the 
first 2-3 years of enterprise-scale implementation of workflow-
enhancing tools, particularly when deployed across rural 
networks.

Shared Payer Administrative Savings & Risk Alignment:

      Structure demonstrations so payers participating in 
integrated EHR and workflow platforms are eligible to share in 
documented reductions in administrative costs, denial rates, 
and unnecessary utilization. For example, CMS could allow 
Medicare Advantage plans or Medicaid MCOs to retain a portion 
of savings generated through real-time clinical integration, 
automated prior authorization, and AI-enabled documentation-
provided savings are reinvested into provider-facing workflow 
improvements.

                        Senator Elizabeth Warren


    Question:

    Insurance conglomerates and wholesale drug distributors are 
now major employers of physicians. For example, UnitedHealth 
Group (UHG) is the nation's largest employer of physicians, and 
McKesson owns the largest community oncology network.
    Are you concerned about how these middlemen influence their 
physician employees and independent physician competitors, 
including graduates of your medical school, given their 
incentives to raise prices, lower quality, and drive 
independent providers out of business?

    Response:

    Organized medicine, in general, opposes the corporate 
practice of medicine because these types of arrangements can 
compromise patient care. Over the past decade or so, physician 
groups have been consolidating at an unprecedented pace. 
Medical groups keep growing larger as physician practices merge 
or sell out in the face of serious economic challenges and, as 
a result, there are now more physicians serving as employes 
than as practice owners. In short, the medical landscape has 
fundamentally changed and there are no signs that this change 
is set to reverse course. One critical reason for this shift is 
that it has become increasingly difficult to manage the cost 
and complexity of running an independent practice, particularly 
due to regulatory red tape and unfair insurance practices.
    In addition, the conversion factor under the Medicare 
Physician Fee Schedule is not pegged to inflation and has 
fallen around 33% in real value since 2001, which poses a 
serious challenge for physicians who care for seniors. Given 
this reality, it is more important than ever to support 
physicians that want to remain in private practice, so that 
doctors who do not want to work for larger organizations will 
continue to have the opportunity to practice independently. To 
do this, we must cut down on burdens like prior authorization, 
end step-therapy or "fail first" protocols, eliminate unfair 
payment practices such as retroactive denials, ensure that 
payors maintain adequate networks of physicians, and provide 
annual Medicare payment updates that track inflation. Taken 
together, these measures would help make it easier for small 
medical practices to remain economically viable in this 
challenging environment and reduce the spread of the corporate 
practice of medicine.
    It is important to distinguish care-aligned integration 
from middleman-driven consolidation.
    Integrated delivery and financial systems like Kaiser 
Permanente and UPMC align insurance, care delivery, and 
population health accountability under unified governance. 
Their success depends on keeping patients healthy, reducing 
unnecessary utilization, and reinvesting in clinical 
infrastructure, creating a fundamentally different incentive 
structure.
    By contrast, when insurance conglomerates or wholesale drug 
distributors employ physicians or acquire networks without 
direct accountability for care delivery, there is always the 
risk that financial incentives, not patient outcomes, drive 
decisions. That concern is heightened when those entities also 
compete with independent practices or control access points 
like drug purchasing, referrals, prior authorization, or data.
    The concern is not physician employment itself, but who 
controls clinical decision-making and market leverage. At the 
same time, fragmentation is not the answer.
    Ultimately, policy should encourage integration models that 
align financing, care, and accountability, while placing 
guardrails around consolidation that narrows competition or 
compromises clinical autonomy.

Examples:

      Risk-Bearing Requirement for Advanced Payment Models: 
Limit eligibility for top-tier shared-savings, global budget, 
or capitation programs to organizations that directly deliver 
care and assume downside clinical risk-favoring Integrated 
Delivery and Finance System (IDFS) over administrative 
intermediaries.

      System-Level Quality & Cost Accountability: Attribute 
outcomes, utilization, and total cost of care at the integrated 
system level (not subsidiary or vendor level), advantage 
organizations where financing and clinical operations are 
inseparable.

      Care-First Antitrust Presumption: Apply more permissive 
antitrust treatment to vertically integrated entities that both 
finance and deliver care (e.g., Kaiser), while applying 
stricter scrutiny to entities that control care pathways 
without delivering care themselves.

    In addition to the support for physician practices, support 
for patient participation in digital support tools must be 
considered. In many rural areas, connectivity to the internet 
is a problem. Satellite internet is slow and expensive. Many 
patients do not have home internet. Telehealth and tele-
consults are helpful when patients can get access to the 
internet; however, Medicaid apparently stopped paying for tele-
consult services after the peak of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                        Questions for the Record

                             Dr. Lee Gross

                        Senator Elizabeth Warren

    Question:

    In 2010, you started a direct primary care practice. Direct 
primary care practices typically charge patients a flat fee to 
cover basic services and do not accept public or private 
insurance. This often requires insured patients to forgo their 
benefits and pay out of pocket.
    1(a)What role did large insurance conglomerates play in 
your decision to start a direct primary care practice?
    1(b)Would legislative reform that breaks up Big Medicine 
conglomerates make it easier for you to run your practice?
    1(c)Would legislative reforms that prohibit prior 
authorization make it easier for you to run your practice?

    Response to 1(a):

    Large insurance entities were not the only factor in my 
decision, but they were part of a broader structural 
environment that increasingly shaped how care was delivered. 
Over time, payment architecture and administrative requirements 
began to exert growing influence on clinical workflows. 
Utilization management protocols, prior authorization 
requirements, and complex billing rules were originally 
introduced with the stated goal of protecting patients from 
inappropriate or excessive care. In practice, these systems 
gradually evolved into administrative layers that often operate 
independently of the clinical encounter itself.
    As these processes expanded, they began to consume 
increasing amounts of physician time and practice resources. 
The cumulative effect made it harder to sustain a model 
centered on continuity, access, and individualized decision 
making. Policies intended to address isolated misuse became 
standardized requirements applied across the entire system. 
Tools designed to identify outliers came to shape routine care. 
Over time, the system shifted from targeting rare instances of 
misuse to treating every clinical decision as if it required 
preauthorization, effectively replacing professional trust with 
administrative permission.
    Direct primary care allowed me to test whether removing 
administrative friction between physician and patient would 
change outcomes. By simplifying payment and eliminating 
intermediated approval requirements for routine care, the model 
reduced overhead and increased time available for clinical 
care. The objective was not to avoid insurers, but to evaluate 
what happens when administrative complexity is minimized and 
clinical decisions occur directly within the physician patient 
relationship.
    My experience working with DeSoto Memorial Hospital 
illustrates this dynamic. The hospital implemented a self 
funded employee health plan that eliminated prior authorization 
and similar approval barriers for routine care within the 
plan's structure for employees that chose DPC. Removing those 
administrative layers allowed treating physicians to proceed 
based on clinical judgment rather than external authorization. 
The result was a substantial reduction in total health plan 
spending along with improved employee benefits. That outcome 
highlights an important distinction. When administrative 
intermediaries are removed from routine care decisions, both 
cost and access can improve simultaneously. This suggests that 
many inefficiencies attributed to medical care itself may 
instead originate within payment and oversight structures that 
sit between patients and clinicians.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    Response to 1(b):

    Market concentration in healthcare warrants serious 
scrutiny, particularly when corporate structures combine 
financing, delivery, pharmacy, and utilization oversight within 
the same enterprise. When a single entity is responsible for 
paying for care, determining whether care is approved, and in 
some cases delivering that care, structural conflicts of 
interest are not theoretical. From an incentive design 
standpoint, they are inherent. Such arrangements create 
powerful financial incentives to influence clinical pathways, 
access to services, and treatment approvals in ways that may 
not be transparent to patients or physicians.
    These vertically integrated models can shift decision 
making authority away from the point of care and toward 
entities whose primary fiduciary obligation is financial 
performance rather than clinical outcomes. That dynamic can 
affect utilization policies, network design, reimbursement 
structures, and approval standards. When those levers are 
controlled within the same organization, the distinction 
between clinical management and financial management can become 
blurred.
    At the same time, consolidation trends reflect multiple 
reinforcing forces, including regulatory complexity, reporting 
mandates, and compliance costs that disproportionately burden 
smaller practices. Many physicians have entered large systems 
not because of clinical preference, but because scale offers 
protection from administrative overhead that independent 
practices struggle to absorb. In that sense, consolidation is 
not purely a market phenomenon. It is often a rational response 
to policy design.
    For that reason, structural breakups alone would not 
automatically restore a competitive physician led marketplace. 
If the regulatory environment that favors scale remains 
unchanged, new entities would likely reconsolidate to manage 
the same administrative demands. Structural remedies may 
therefore be necessary, but they will not be sufficient unless 
policymakers also address the underlying policy incentives that 
make consolidation economically rational.

    Response to 1(c):

    Yes. Prior authorization is among the most resource 
intensive administrative processes in clinical medicine. It 
requires time, staffing, and documentation that do not directly 
contribute to patient care. In many cases it delays treatment 
while approvals are obtained from third parties who are not 
directly involved in the clinical evaluation.
    Reducing unnecessary prior authorization requirements would 
improve efficiency and timeliness of care. It would also 
redirect clinical staff time toward patient services rather 
than administrative processing. More broadly, it would help 
restore decision making authority to the point of care, where 
physicians are accountable for outcomes. Oversight mechanisms 
are important, but when approval processes become routine 
prerequisites for standard treatment, they can shift control of 
clinical decisions away from those directly responsible for the 
patient and toward entities whose primary role is financial 
administration.

Additional Concern: Expansion of Prior Authorization and Risk 
of Administrative Drift

    Recent policy developments indicate that prior 
authorization requirements are being introduced into additional 
areas of public coverage through pilot programs that apply 
prospective approval requirements to selected services. These 
initiatives are intended to improve program integrity and 
reduce inappropriate spending. At the same time, they 
illustrate how administrative tools introduced for limited 
purposes can expand over time in both scope and operational 
impact.
    Historical experience suggests that utilization management 
systems can evolve beyond their initial targets. In the private 
sector, some insurers previously used physician utilization 
scoring programs tied to prescribing or imaging patterns. 
Physicians with higher scores were exempt from certain 
administrative steps, while others faced increasing approval 
requirements. In practice, such systems often affected 
clinicians who treated more complex patients or who practiced 
in fields where higher utilization reflected appropriate care.
    Another example of clinical guidance evolving into 
administrative constraint is the American Geriatrics Society 
Beers Criteria. Originally intended as a reference tool to help 
clinicians identify potentially inappropriate medications in 
older adults, the criteria have increasingly been incorporated 
into quality metrics, payer policies, and utilization controls. 
In some settings this has effectively turned a clinical 
guideline into a compliance standard, where deviation can 
trigger scrutiny even when medically appropriate. This 
illustrates a recurring policy pattern. Tools created to inform 
physician judgment can gradually be repurposed to regulate it.
    The concern is not the existence of oversight mechanisms, 
but how they evolve. Safeguards that begin as targeted 
protections can, if not periodically reassessed, become 
generalized administrative requirements that influence routine 
care decisions.

Additional Policy Perspective for the Record

    The central problem in healthcare is rarely who 
participates in the system. It is how the rules shape their 
incentives.
    Certain statutory and regulatory structures can 
unintentionally influence institutional behavior through their 
design. Payment rules that tie allowable administrative margins 
to total spending levels, for example, may affect how 
organizations evaluate cost reducing innovations. While such 
policies may limit excessive overhead, they can also create 
situations in which lowering total spending alters financial 
calculations for participating entities.
    Organizations generally respond predictably to the 
incentives embedded within policy frameworks. When those 
incentives reward volume, complexity, or administrative control 
rather than efficiency and outcomes, system behavior will 
reflect that structure. Policymakers therefore face an 
incentive design challenge rather than a choice between public 
or private delivery models. The key issue is whether payment 
policy aligns institutional incentives with the goals of 
affordability, access, and clinical quality.
    Sustainable reform is most likely when those incentives are 
calibrated so that patients, physicians, employers, and payers 
all benefit from the same outcome: appropriate care delivered 
efficiently, transparently, and with minimal administrative 
friction.

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                        Questions for the Record

                             Jeffrey Smith

                        Senator Elizabeth Warren

    Question:

    The passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, coupled with 
the expiration of the Affordable Care Act's enhanced premium 
tax credits, will likely lead to a significant increase in the 
number of uninsured Americans and a concurrent increase in 
uncompensated care, compounding the financial pressures on 
safety-net hospitals and independent physician practices.
    How do you anticipate providers and safety-net hospitals 
will respond?

    Response:

    Medical groups will likely provide more uncompensated care 
and face new financial pressures as patients lose coverage due 
to the ACA enhanced premium tax credit expiration and Medicaid 
changes under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The response from 
medical group practices will depend on the ability of their 
respective states to intervene and offset some of these costs 
through state-level assistance and policy. Practices, 
especially in underserved and rural areas who serve a diverse 
payer mix, will face financial strain as they absorb more care 
without payment, threatening the stability of safety-net access 
points and independent practices.
    As uninsured rates increase, medical group practices will 
be forced to take on a substantial administrative burden, such 
as increased eligibility verifications. Front-office staff will 
also shoulder the burden of helping patients who may have lost 
coverage and facilitating out of pocket payment options. As 
financial pressures intensify, group practices may be pushed 
toward selling their practices or closing entirely.

    Question:

    How will intensifying consolidation further erode 
physicians' autonomy over their patients' medical care?

    Response:

    Consolidation results from physician owners selling their 
practices and becoming employed in a health system or hospital. 
This change can impact physician autonomy because, unlike 
smaller practices, large health systems often operate in more 
structured environments and may lead to less physician control 
over their schedules, practice structure, and other operational 
activities. By contrast, independent groups can offer 
physicians meaningful control over their work, where partners 
may set their own schedules and adjust workloads, and shape 
operational decision-making.
    2025 State of Private Medical Practice report speaks to how 
intensifying consolidation impacts autonomy. The survey was 
conducted online from April - May 2025 and received a total of 
240 responses.

      Consolidation is a top driver of declining optimism: 
Among leaders who feel less optimistic about independent 
practice, 54% cite "increasing consolidation of healthcare".
      Autonomy is a central component of professional 
independence: 40% of members identify autonomy and independent 
decision-making as a key benefit of private practice, while 47% 
cite quality of care/patient focused as a key benefit of 
working in an independent practice.
      Financial and payer pressures are pushing groups toward 
mergers and acquisition, shifting governance away from 
physicians: When asked about necessary changes to ensure 
practices' sustainability, 28% of respondents selected 
"increasing practice size via mergers and acquisitions," 
signaling that many practices view consolidation as survival.
    Question:

    Following a February 2024 cyberattack on its subsidiary, 
Change Healthcare, UHG extended emergency loans to affected 
providers via its subsidiary bank, Optum Financial. Physician 
borrowers later reported that UHG was acting like a "loan 
shark," abruptly demanding full repayment under threat of yet 
another subsidiary, the insurer UnitedHealthcare, and 
garnishing claim reimbursements as a means of repayment.
    If applicable, can you provide examples of the way that 
Optum Financial and UHG are treating your members who were 
forced to take these emergency loans?

    Response:

    While we are aware of ongoing lawsuits related to the 
Change Healthcare cyberattack, we have not heard from members 
about their current interactions with Optum Financial.

    Question:

    Are any of your members still dealing with the financial 
fallout from this cyberattack and UHG's response to it? If so, 
in what ways are they affected?

    Response:

    The Change Healthcare cyberattack had wide-ranging 
financial impacts for medical groups beginning in February 
2024, that included:

      Substantial billing and cash flow disruptions, such as a 
lack of electronic claims processing. Both paper and electronic 
statements were delayed, with some groups going without any 
outgoing charges or incoming payments immediately following the 
cyberattack.
      Limited or no electronic remittance advice from health 
plans, groups had to manually pull and post from payer portals.
      Prior authorization submissions were rejected or were 
not transmittable at all.
      Lack of connectivity to important data infrastructure.
      Lack of ability to perform eligibility checks for 
patients.
    Members continued to express residual financial concerns 
into 2025 related to unpaid claims, benchmarking and data 
issues, and more. While we have not heard from members recently 
given the amount of time that has passed, all of these 
disruptions amplified underlying systemic financial issues, 
such as staffing shortages and continued inadequate 
reimbursement from Medicare.

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                        Questions for the Record

                               Cory Feist

                          Chairman Rick Scott

    Question:

    You highlighted during the hearing that even modest 
reductions in documentation and administrative workload can 
meaningfully increase patient-facing time and reduce burnout. 
For small, independent, or rural practices that lack large IT 
departments, what types of digital infrastructure or workflow-
support platforms are most practical and scalable to eliminate 
redundant documentation, streamline prior authorization, and 
improve care coordination?

    Response:

    Thank you for the opportunity to respond to Chairman 
Scott's questions regarding the administrative burdens fueling 
the exodus of physicians from the medical profession. For 
small, independent, and rural practices, the "administrative 
tax" is a primary driver of burnout and distress. To support 
clinicians serving in these critical settings, we must 
prioritize digital infrastructure that is interoperable, 
automated, and low-friction.
    Before implementing specific technologies, I urge all 
practice leaders to review and implement action steps outlined 
in the Impact WellbeingT Guide: Taking Action to Improve 
Healthcare Worker Wellbeing. This transformative resource, 
supported by the Dr. Lorna Breen Health Care Provider 
Protection Act, has already equipped over 35,000 healthcare 
leaders with evidencebased strategies to address the 
operational factors and burdens that drive their workforce's 
burnout.
    Practice leaders can then take additional steps to reduce 
documentation burden, streamlineworkflow, and improve care 
coordination:

    Reducing the Documentation Burden: Ambient Listening AI 
Technology

    The Electronic Health Record (EHR) has transitioned from a 
clinical tool to a billing ledger, forcing physicians into 
"pajama time". For small practices, ambient listening AI 
technology or AI-driven scribes represent a significant leap in 
workload reduction. Recent implementation of the Impact 
Wellbeing Guide by one Virginia hospital showed that Ambient 
listening AI technology can reduce documentation time by 10-15 
minutes per patient visit while simultaneously improving 
patient experience ratings. Another rural Virginia hospital 
decreased their workforce's cognitive burden by addressing EHR 
alert fatigue-reducing unnecessaryinpatient alerts by 52% and 
unnecessary ambulatory alerts by 73% per month.
    By automating the generation of structured clinical notes, 
ambient listening AI technology allows physicians and other 
care givers to return their focus to the patient rather than a 
screen.

Streamlining Workflow: Electronic Prior Authorization (ePA)

    Prior authorizations are a source of profound 
administrative burden as clinicians spend nearly two business 
days a week completing these requirements. Similar to the 
legislative approaches in New Jersey and Virginia, we must move 
toward integrated ePA platforms that reside within the e-
prescribing workflow. I strongly urge the Committee to support 
S. 1816 The Improving Seniors' Timely Access to Care Act of 
2025 to reduce this administrative burden and ensure seniors 
can access the treatments they need.

Improving Care Coordination: Asynchronous Communication

    Rural health is inherently collaborative, yet clinicians 
are often underwater with documentation and coordination tasks. 
We recommend the adoption of HIPAA-compliant asynchronous 
messaging hubs to replace the inefficiency of "phone tag". 
Furthermore, practices should address EHR alert fatigue. As 
noted above, we have seen evidence in Virginia that targeted 
quality improvement projects can reduce unnecessary ambulatory 
alerts by up to 73% per month, significantly decreasing the 
cognitive burden on the workforce.
    Beyond technical infrastructure, we must address the 
"invisible" administrative barriers that prevent clinicians 
from seeking help. Many legacy licensing and credentialing 
applications ask intrusive, stigmatizing questions about a 
clinician's mental health history. Consistent with 
recommendations in the Impact Wellbeing Guide, our Foundation 
and its coalition of national healthcare organizations has 
supported 70 licensure boards and 2,115 health care facilities 
in auditing and removing these questions, improving access to 
mental health care for more than 2.64 million licensed health 
workers. By shifting the focus from past diagnosis to current 
impairment, we create a culture where getting mental health 
support is treated as a normal, healthy part of the job.
    For the independent physician, time is the most precious 
resource. The newly reauthorized Lorna Breen Act prioritizes 
projects that reduce administrative burden, freeing up 
clinicians to focus on patient care while supporting their 
wellbeing. I urge Congress to provide full funding of $45M in 
FY27 for Lorna Breen Act programs. By funding these programs 
now and in the future, and by taking the steps outlined above, 
we can protect the backbone of our healthcare system. We must 
move from a system that depletes our workforce to one that 
sustains them with safety and operational support.

    Question:

    What federal policy changes would most accelerate adoption 
of such solutions while maintaining appropriate safeguards for 
patient privacy and program integrity?

    Response:

    To most effectively accelerate the adoption of these 
burnout-reducing technologies while maintaining program 
integrity and patient privacy, federal policy must transition 
from permissive to proactive support.
    Based on the evidence-based framework of the National 
Academy of Medicine (NAM) National Plan for Health Workforce 
Well-Being and the operational successes of the Dr. Lorna Breen 
Health Care Provider Protection Act, we recommend the following 
federal policy changes:

Sustained Funding for Workforce Retention

    Federal investment has historically focused on the pipeline 
(creating new clinicians) while ignoring the leaks (losing 
existing clinicians). As I referenced in my written testimony, 
tens of billions of dollars are directed annually for 
healthcare workforce creation initiatives, but the Lorna Breen 
Act programs are the only ones to directly support workforce 
retention. Congress must provide full and consistent annual 
funding for the newly reauthorized Lorna Breen Act, which 
ensures federal dollars are used for proven operational 
improvements rather than superficial wellness programs.

Standardizing Electronic Prior Authorization (ePA)

    The administrative burden of prior authorizations currently 
consumes nearly two business days a week for physicians. By 
passing and implementing S. 1816 The Improving Seniors' Timely 
Access to Care Act, we can ensure a standardized, real-time 
electronic prior authorization process for Medicare Advantage 
plans. Utilizing the HL7 FHIR (Fast Healthcare Interoperability 
Resources) standard will ensure secure and transparent data 
exchange that does not create new avenues for "upcoding" or 
fraudulent claims.

Codifying Documentation Relief through AI "Safe Harbors"

    While Ambient Notes AI can reduce documentation time by 10-
15 minutes per patient visit, small practices often hesitate to 
adopt it due to concerns over future audit scrutiny. By 
establishing CMS "Safe Harbor" guidelines that explicitly 
recognize AI-generated, physicianvalidated ambient notes as 
meeting medical necessity and documentation requirements for 
Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement, will give small practices the 
peace of mind they need to adopt this transformative 
technology. Requiring these platforms to maintain HIPAA-
compliant, SOC2-certified data encryption will ensure patient 
conversations remain private and are not used for unauthorized 
secondary purposes.

Incentivizing "Low-Burden" EHR Configurations

    Small practices often suffer from "EHR alert fatigue," yet 
they lack the IT staff to optimize these systems. By 
establishing federal grants or "Wellbeing Meaningful Use" 
incentives for EHR vendors and practices that successfully 
reduce cognitive load, we can help small practices make the 
most of these systems, perhaps even achieving benchmarks like 
the 73% reduction in ambulatory alerts as demonstrated by 
quality improvement projects implemented in Virginia using the 
Lorna Breen Act resources. This shifts the focus of technology 
from a billing ledger to a clinical tool that supports-rather 
than depletes-the workforce.
    We cannot care for our aging population if we do not care 
for those who care for them. By removing the red tape and 
making technology work for people, we preserve the 30 to 40 
years of expertise each clinician provides to the American 
public - an urgent priority given projected workforce 
shortages.

    Question:

    Additionally, how should federal payment or demonstration 
programs be structured to incentivize adoption of workflow-
enhancing digital tools, including AIenabled documentation, 
coding, or administrative support platforms that measurably 
reduce clinician time spent on non-clinical tasks?

    Response:

    To move the needle on clinician burnout, federal payment 
and demonstration programs must shift from rewarding volume of 
documentation to rewarding quality of care for patients and 
clinicians.
    By funding newly reauthorized Lorna Breen Act grants, 
Congress can help support operational changes that reduce 
administrative burden. With resources from the Lorna Breen Act, 
hospitals have successfully improved the wellbeing of health 
workers by decreasing administrative burden. They have seen 
significant decreases in both diagnosed mental health 
conditions like depression and turnover.
    Federal demonstrations should require the use of evidence-
based or evidence-informed resources like the Impact WellbeingT 
Guide to ensure that digital tools are integrated into a 
supportive, safe workplace culture rather than simply added to 
existing workloads.

Mandating Interoperability for Prior Authorization

    Federal policy must accelerate the adoption of electronic 
Prior Authorization (ePA) to eliminate the "clerical detective 
work" that currently consumes nearly two business days a week 
for physician staff.
    Immediate passage and implementation of S. 1816 The 
Improving Seniors' Timely Access to Care Act of 2025 would 
mandate a standardized electronic process for Medicare 
Advantage plans. Future payment models should penalize "manual-
only" authorization processes that delay care and increase 
clinician distress.

Removing Legal and Regulatory Barriers to Wellbeing

    Incentivizing use of effective technological tools is only 
half the battle; we must also ensure thatclinicians feel safe 
enough to seek support while they manage these system 
transitions.
    Federal programs should require participating health 
systems to audit and remove stigmatizingmental health questions 
from their credentialing applications. To date, this initiative 
has alreadyimproved access to care for more than 438,000 
credentialed health workers.

Tiered Reimbursement Incentives for "Burden-Reduced" Care

    Federal payment programs, particularly those within CMS, 
should provide enhancedreimbursement or bonus payments for 
practices that utilize certified ambient listening AItechnology 
and other AI-enabled administrative tools.
    A "Wellbeing Tier" within the Merit-based Incentive Payment 
System (MIPS) or AlternativePayment Models (APMs) could reward 
practices based on a number of factors such as measurably 
reducing time spent on non-clinical tasks. For one rural 
hospital in Virginia, the use of ambient listening AI has been 
shown to reduce documentation time by 10-15 minutes per patient 
visit, directly allowing for more patient-facing time.
    Implementing these and other similar programs, we need to 
balance the federal investment between focusing exclusively on 
pipeline creation to prioritizing workforce retention. By 
providing full and consistent annual funding for Lorna Breen 
Act programs in FY27 and beyond, Congress can ensure that 
technology works for people, preserving our health workforce to 
care for our aging population.


      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
=======================================================================


                       Statements for the Record

=======================================================================




      

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

                    American Academy of Dermatology
                    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

            American Academy of Family Physicians Statement
            
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

         American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons Statement
         
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

          American Clinical Neurophysiology Society Statement
          
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

      American Economic Liberties: Healthcare Middlemen Statement
      
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

       American Economic Liberties: Medicare Advantage Statement
       
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

     American Economic Liberties: One Big Beautiful Bill Statement
     
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

       American Economic Liberties: United Health Group Statement
       
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

                American Hospital Association Statement
                
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

            American Physical Therapy Association Statement
            
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

            American Podiatric Medical Association Statement
            
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

      The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists Statement
      
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

                American Society of Hematology Statement
                
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

            American Society of Retina Specialists Statement
            
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

                  Primary Care Collaborative Statement
                  
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

                 Regulatory Relief Coalition Statement
                 
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

                       Ryan McClenahan Statement
                       
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

  "The Doctor is Out: How Washington's Rules Drove Physician's Out of 
                               Medicine"

                           February 11, 2026

                       Statements for the Record

             Society of General Internal Medicine Statement
             
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]