Ken McClure, lobbyist for the Idaho Medical Association, said, "There are good things in the bill. It brings some management and coherence to the expenditure of public funds. We believe it brings some opportunity for savings in a significant amount." But he said he signed up to testify in opposition to HB 221. If enacted as currently written, he said, the bill would reduce physician reimbursement to Medicare levels for primary care and to below-Medicare levels for non-primary care. "That is a significant reduction for a lot of people," he said. "When you combine that with the way the co-pay in the bill actually works ... you get a compounding of reduction in fees, because the provider either has to collect the fee from the patient ... in many cases he or she won't be able to ... it becomes an additional reduction in the fee that you pay the physician."

He also noted the repeal of the cost-of-living increase in physician rates, which he said was implemented in the 1990s when doctors' rates hadn't been raised in 17 years. It's there to make sure doctors are available to see Medicaid patients, McClure said. "My concern is that you are going to see significantly fewer physicians who will participate."