Congressman Bob Filners mayoral campaign has often aimed to portray him as a unifier and his competitor, City Councilman Carl DeMaio, as a divider. Filner argues he would be better than DeMaio at crossing party lines and solving problems at City Hall.

To bolster his argument, Filner has often pointed to his congressional record and specifically, his push to expand veterans' benefits. He was chairman of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs from 2007 to 2010 and remains the committees ranking Democratic member today.

Talking about his tenure as chairman at an Aug. 9 mayoral debate, Filner claimed his leadership had resulted in substantial budget increases for veterans benefits and won unanimous support from Congress. Heres the full quote:

We decided to Fact Check the statement because Filner has repeatedly cited an increase in the budget for veterans health care to prop up his congressional record and in this case, also cited unanimous support from Congress, bolstering his campaign theme.

Weve rated part of his claim Mostly True, the other part as Huckster Propaganda.

Our analysis below is broken down by each claim. First well examine whether the budget increased by 65 percent while Filner was chairman of the House of Representatives committee, and then well review whether Congress unanimously approved the additional funds.

Claim: A 65 percent increase while Filner was chairman.

Analysis: Budget documents back up Filners percentage.

But its important to understand how it was calculated. He was chairman of the Committee on Veterans Affairs for four years, though the percentage describes how funding changed over six.

Go here to see the original:

Boosting the Veterans’ Health Care Budget: Fact Check

It has been a central campaign promise from Mitt Romney: His Medicare overhaul plan would not touch benefits for anyone older than 55. That may not, however, be the case with the Republican presidential nominee’s other health-care proposals. A growing body of research suggests that his plans to repeal the Affordable Care Act and cut Medicaid funding would have a direct impact on the health care ...

See the article here:

Romney’s health care plans don’t exempt today’s seniors

CHICAGO, Sept. 17, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Health Care Service Corporation (HCSC), and Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Montana (BCBSMT), today announced their intention for BCBSMT to join forces with the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Plans in Illinois, Texas, Oklahoma and New Mexico in a new alliance with HCSC, which operates these Plans. HCSC is an Illinois mutual legal reserve company, operates as a not-for-profit, and is the nation's largest customer-owned health insurer. BCBSMT is Montana's largest and longest standing health plan with approximately 272,000 members.

This alliance, once it receives regulatory approval, will bring together HCSC and BCBSMT in a business combination of dedicated people, best practices, innovative technology, and other assets to advance health care excellence in the state of Montana.

The two companies announced that they are in the early stages of planning how the alliance will come together. This alliance is expected to result in additional charitable benefits to the state of Montana.

"The premier health insurance company in Montana is about to get even better," said Michael E. Frank, President and CEO of BCBSMT, who will continue to lead the Montana Plan. "For more than 70 years we have been providing Montanans with access to affordable health care coverage and administrative services, and we will do so for 70 more. As we look to the future of health care in Montana, we believe HCSC will bolster our efforts to serve the unique needs of our state."

"We're pleased to be joining forces with BCBSMT to serve the people of Montana. What we bring to the table through this alliance are additional resources to offer affordable health care coverage to every corner of Montana in new and innovative ways," said Patricia Hemingway Hall, President and CEO of HCSC. "We look forward to working with Mike Frank and his leadership team."

Frank added, "Being part of the largest customer owned insurer in the country will allow us to take advantage of HCSC's scale, financial strength, and new collaborative technology and tools so that we can better serve our members and strengthen our partnership with Montana's outstanding physicians and hospitals."

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Montana is a not-for-profit health insurer that serves approximately 272,000 members through a provider network of nearly 2,000 physicians, all Montana hospitals, and 2,800 allied health care providers. BCBSMT is the state's largest and (oldest) health insurer.

About Health Care Service Corporation Health Care Service Corporation is the country's largest customer-owned health insurer and fourth largest health insurer overall, with more than 13 million members in its Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans in Illinois, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas. A Mutual Legal Reserve Company, HCSC is an independent licensee of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association. For more information, please visit http://www.HCSC.com, visit our Facebook page or follow us at http://www.twitter.com/HCSC.

About the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Montana Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Montana, a not-for-profit mutual insurance company, is a leader in delivering innovative health insurance products, services and information to more than 270,000 members. For over 70 years, the company has served its customers by offering health insurance at a competitive price and has served the people of Montana through support of community organizations, programs and events that promote good health. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Montana is an independent licensee of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association.

The rest is here:

Health Care Service Corporation And Blue Cross And Blue Shield Of Montana To Join Forces

BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) - The new leader of the LSU health care system, working with Gov. Bobby Jindal's administration to make deep cuts to the public hospitals, earlier this year slammed the governor for slashing funding to the facilities.

"Yes, he is saving money. But to save money and lose your soul in doing so, I have to ask if that is the Christian way?" Frank Opelka wrote in a letter printed by The Advocate newspaper in February - after midyear budget cuts hit university health programs.

Seven months later, Opelka is working side-by-side with the governor's health care secretary, Bruce Greenstein, to shrink far more spending on the safety net system of hospital and clinics that care for the uninsured.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Opelka said the newspaper letter was designed to draw attention to "our cut after cut strategy, which was not helping patients."

He said the Jindal administration isn't seeking such a strategy in the latest round of cuts, which Opelka is overseeing since his predecessor was ousted from the job after clashing with the administration over the budget reductions.

"I want us to be mindful of the impact. I don't think one cut after another is the best way to determine safety net care," said Opelka, LSU's executive vice president for health care and medical education redesign.

Opelka said the Jindal administration is pushing for collaborations with local community health providers to try to protect critical services and patient care.

"They don't want a cut strategy. They want a partnership strategy," Opelka said.

The Jindal administration has stripped a quarter of the health system's funding in response to a drop in federal Medicaid financing, and Jindal says LSU must change its model of providing services and embrace public/private partnerships.

The drop in funding is expected to reach more than $300 million in the next budget year that begins July 1.

See the original post here:

LSU hospitals chief once blasted Jindal for cuts

WASHINGTON Having trouble finding a doctor? You're not alone.

Tens of millions of adults under age 65 both those with insurance and those without saw their access to health care worsen dramatically over the past decade, according to a study abstract released Monday.

The findings suggest that more privately insured Americans are delaying treatment because of rising out-of-pocket costs, while safety-net programs for the poor and uninsured are failing to keep up with demand for care, say Urban Institute researchers who wrote the report.

Overall, the study published in the journal Health Affairs found that one in five American adults under 65 had an "unmet medical need" because of costs in 2010, compared with one in eight in 2000. They also had a harder time accessing dental care, according to the analysis based on data from annual federal surveys of adults.

"For decades, Americans have been facing costs rising well above wage levels," said Lynn Quincy, senior policy analyst for Consumers Union, a nonpartisan group. "These are real families. ... It's very concerning."

The 2010 health care law, which will expand health coverage to 30 million people starting in 2014, won't necessarily solve all those access problems, the study said. That's because the law, which is under review by the Supreme Court, may not alter the trend toward private insurance policies with larger deductibles and higher co-payments or address some of the barriers within public coverage. While the law does increase payments temporarily to primary care doctors who see people covered by Medicaid, it will not force more doctors into the program, or require states to provide dental coverage to adults.

Quincy noted that the law does offer several new strategies, such as new payment methods to control rising costs, which could help improve access, but there's no guarantee they will work.

The study underscores what's at stake in the law's coverage expansion: People with private or public health insurance have significantly better access to care than the uninsured. If the law is overturned or scaled back, "we would be likely to see further deterioration in access to care for all adults uninsured and insured alike," it concludes.

The percent of adults with private insurance who reported an "unmet medical need" doubled to 10 percent from 2000 to 2010, while those who delayed seeking care because of cost rose from 4 percent to 7 percent in the same period, according to the study.

Genevieve Kenney, lead author and senior fellow at the Urban Institute, speculated that higher cost sharing and deductibles that shift more of the cost onto individuals could be driving those changes.

Read more:

Health, dental care increasingly out of reach for millions