This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.


  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:

I’m aware of at least two Democratic Senators, Claire McCaskill (D-MO) and Dick Durbin (D-IL), who have appeared on television to promote the idea of means-testing Medicare. Such means-testing can be accomplished with 1) higher office visit and emergency room co-payments, 2) higher co-insurance payments for medical tests and procedures, and/or 3) higher Medicare premiums. Of course, the first two approaches are, by definition, benefit cuts—cuts that the progressive community, among others, is fighting hard to prevent. The third approach, I would argue, is a back-door benefit cut in part because it only impacts Medicare beneficiaries with no change to how Medicare is taxed. Nevertheless, when appearing in public, Democratic officials are vague about which approach or combination of approaches that they’re proposing. It’s up to us to let them know that no such approach is acceptable.

In the meantime, however, I continue to be disappointed that some of our Democratic representatives can’t keep their mouths shut about benefit cuts until Republicans say, publicly, what they mean by entitlement “reform.” We all know that they seek benefit cuts, but to my knowledge, Republican leaders have been smart enough, since the election anyway, not to say this either in writing or on television. Democrats have no business helping the Republican cause by proposing, on television, ideas that are further to the right than what leading Republicans have publicly specified. If Durbin and McCaskill expect Republicans and their super-PACS to honor some kind of an “ad moratorium” about Medicare in 2014 after Democrats were the first to publicly propose billions in benefit cuts, then I’m afraid that they’re in for an unhappy surprise.

The bigger question is, after winning an election, and with the polls (and the issues) on our side, why are Democrats on defense at all with this issue? Why are we trying to stop benefit cuts when we have the White House, the Senate, and received more votes for the House (despite its red tilt due to gerrymandering)? I suggest that the reason is that Democratic officials (and perhaps the rest of us) haven’t gone on offense on this issue. Republicans want Medicare reform, but they want us to define it for them. We should. And we should beat them over the proverbial head with it.

Democratic officials should show the public that they support Medicare reform by formally and immediately proposing and seeking a vote on allowing Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices. Of course this isn’t a new idea, but Democrats, it seems, have taken it off the table…ostensibly because they would never get a House vote on it.

Who cares? Go on offense. Take negotiating lower drug prices to the public and compare the savings to Medicare (approximately $400 billion) with savings the Republican idea of increasing the Medicare eligibility age to 67 (about $125 billion). Who are the deficit hawks in this scenario? Who is fighting for Medicare beneficiaries and who is fighting for corporate interests? What is the more likely short-term compromise? Limited benefit cuts through means-testing or no benefit cuts? And in the 2014 mid-term elections, which idea for Medicare reform is more likely to carry the day and be enacted down the road?

God dammit Dems, get the Medicare reform defense off the field (e.g., Durbin and McCaskill) and put the offense out there.

Update: Excerpt from Durbin's appearance on yesterday's episode of Meet the Press:

DAVID GREGORY (HOST): I want to pin you down on one point about Medicare. You say you want to basically put off this discussion until later. But bottom line, should the Medicare eligibility age go up? Should there be means testing to really get at the benefits side, if you’re going to shore this program up, because as you say, 12 years before it runs out of money?

DURBIN: Here’s what it comes down to David. I do believe there should be means testing. And those of us with higher income in retirement should pay more. That could be part of the solution...


You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

Extended (Optional)

Your Email has been sent.