Well the writer has two issues:
1.) His wife being a NP(which would be an obvious bias)
2.) His field of medicine is so specialized I doubt he truly knows what a PCP truly does daily.
I have no problem with expansion of scope as long as supervision is involved. If autonomy is wanted then a pathway such as a NP-Physician bridge should be created as well as NP education more standardized.
While I agree to some degree, I honestly don't think any NP, PA, MD or DO can be considered objective or not biased on this issue, myself included. For all you know, the fact that he always saw NPs as very competent and capable is what attracted him to his wife (and not the other way around). He does, at least, point out that he married his wife pretty recently but has been working with NPs for decades. I agree, though, no one is really that objective on this issue. Just look at this site, whenever the topic comes up people get very emotional and not very logical. What I found most interesting was his review of the literature on NPs. It is by no means complete, but I was surprised by the sheer number of studies that support the safety of NP practice. I also agree that the arguments docs use against NP independence are poorly constructed (some of those videos were just embarrassing), as I see that over and over again on this very site.
I also thought it was interesting how he mentioned that the AMA has much more money and power than the ANA (on this site, the ANA is often characterized as some evil lobbying group that bullies the poor, powerless doctors). That's something I'll have to look into.
emedpa - a commenter mentioned the lack of PAs in the article and the author addressed it, I believe. I think he said it was because he was talking about the specific law (which addressed NPs only) and that PAs collaborate or have a supervisory relationship with physicians by definition, so he didn't see it as relevant.