Prioritizing Primary Care Act of 2026
HB8765, titled the Prioritizing Primary Care Act of 2026, would require federal agencies that administer federal health care programs, as well as the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, to submit annual reports to Congress on primary care spending. Those reports would identify the total dollar amount spent or obligated on primary care and the share of overall health-benefit spending attributable to primary care, using a definition of primary care spending to be set by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
The bill also directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a working group within one year of enactment to study how federal health programs can better prioritize primary care, improve access to primary care providers, and strengthen the availability and quality of primary care services. The working group must include relevant federal agencies and nongovernmental entities, consult with states and outside stakeholders, and report recommendations to Congress within one year of its creation, including attention to rural and medically underserved areas.
If enacted, the bill would amend title XI of the Social Security Act by adding a new reporting requirement for federal health programs and creating a formal federal working group on primary care. It would not directly change benefit coverage or payment rules, but it would increase federal oversight and data collection on how much public health spending goes to primary care, potentially influencing future policy, appropriations, and program design across Medicare, Medicaid, other federal health care programs, and FEHBP.
The available context suggests generally favorable or bipartisan interest in the bill’s goals, as it was introduced by members from both parties and focuses on improving primary care access and spending transparency rather than cutting benefits or imposing new restrictions. No committee transcripts or recorded votes are available, so there is no evidence of organized opposition in the provided materials. The bill’s framing around rural and underserved communities also suggests a broadly appealing public-health message.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be administrative and definitional rather than ideological. The bill leaves key terms such as “primary care spending,” “primary care providers,” and “primary care services” to be defined by the Secretary, which could draw concern from agencies or stakeholders seeking clearer statutory standards. Some parties may also question the added reporting burden on federal agencies or the usefulness of another federal working group, while provider, patient, and industry groups may differ on how primary care should be measured and prioritized.