Repeal Obamacar and Set Car Insurance Free

See, it’s drivers like this who are ruining the insurance industry under Obamacar. No more, if the Trumpists have their way. (Wikimedia Photo)

The Trump administration is preparing legislation to repeal and replace Obamacar — their name for the automobile insurance industry, which they say is imploding because of President Obama. “The American people are sick of being forced to buy this hated insurance,” said a Trump spokesman who declined to be identified on the grounds that the President is certifiable and could turn on him at any moment.

“The first thing we’ve got to do,” said the spokes individual, “is get rid of the mandate. It is simply not fair to make everyone buy one-size-fits-all insurance. Or to ask someone whose Mercedes is parked in an air conditioned garage most of the time to pay for the mishaps of someone running around and running into things in a 1989 Honda. In the future we’re only going to sell car insurance to people who don’t have car accidents. Besides, people don’t want to have car insurance, they want access to car insurance, and we’re going to give them lots of choices they can’t afford. Because freedom of choice is what matters.”

In order to stimulate competition in the industry, the proposal bans the term “automobile insurance” and replaces it with “automobile default swaps.” Since it is no longer insurance, there is no further need to regulate the market or the companies in it, and they will be free to do whatever they want. This has always, say the plan’s proponents, been good for America.

Asked what the administration plans to do to protect people damaged by uninsured motorists who in the future may wipe out their cars and their families without recourse, the spokeshuman said, and we quote, “What?”

The plan authorizes the creation of “individual accidental savings accounts.” Poor people will be authorized to set aside up to $50,000 a year in a special account for paying for collision damage. Plus they will be encouraged to do so by not having to pay any federal taxes on the interest earned. “This is a saving of several dollars a month — you get it eventually, when your accountant finally gets your tax refund — and frankly I can’t imagine any poor person not taking full advantage of it.”

Then the spokesthing went on to make an offhand comment that has since become controversial: “Frankly,” it said,  “if these people would buy fewer Bentleys and Jaguars and content themselves with Fords and Chevies, it would be better for them and for America.” This is being widely criticized as an ignorant observation, given the popularity of Lincoln Town Cars among the indigent.

The Obamacar Repeal and Replace legislation has several additional provisions that are proving wildly popular among President Trump’s base (which is now estimated to consist of 250 people in a Johnstown, Pennsylvania bowling league):

  • cars may no longer be used to transport people to or from abortion clinics.
  • car insurance will no longer be offered to LBGTQX drivers. “They have accidents,” said the spokesbeing, “we can’t have that.”   
  • Under no circumstances will insurance be granted to people who, in the words of the statute, “look Muslim. Or Mexican. Or brown.”

In short, said the spokesdude, “America’s long nation Obamacar nightmare is about to be over, as we set car insurance free, to return to the wild where it belongs.”


Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Repeal Obamacar and Set Car Insurance Free

  1. Not sure what to make of this one. Yes, funny and sarcastic, but it seems the tone is satirizing those who wish to see the end of ObammyCare mandated health coverage. If that is the case ( and I’m not misreading this ), I’d like to state that my experience has been nothing but bad since I was forced to buy insurance or pay the fine. One of the factors in my quitting a corporate job and going to self-employment at drastically reduced wages was my former job failing to minimize my hours to avoid the penalty. So, thanks Obammy former First Kenyan, for the reduced income.

    • Dennis Mitchell says:

      Obama cares sucks because the system it supports sucks. Trump care will suck just as bad if not worse. If America keeps voting for the two parties nothing will change. Trump will sure stir the shit, but he will never ever reform the system. America needs more than a game show host. Shame on every American who voted two party. My country sucks because of you!

  2. Mark Janney says:

    Agreed. My son, a medical assistant, makes about $25K/yr. He’s young, healthy and almost never needs to see a doctor. Under Obamacare, he has the choice of spending 12% of his gross income on a policy with a $3000 deductible whose threshold he’ll never cross; or paying a galling penalty at tax time. That 12% comes out of his budget for non-essentials like food, clothing, shelter and transportation.

    A very similar story applies to a member of my church who is a cabinet maker, in the same income range.

    Looks to me like Obamacare provides coverage to the very poor at the expense of the working class: which is precisely why so many of them voted for Trump.

    You can keep Obamacare, but just repeal the part that forces middle income people to buy insurance they can’t afford and can’t use. Maybe the rich ought to be taxed to pay for this instead.

    • Tom Lewis says:

      I’m trying to figure this stuff out. It sounds like your son would be eligible for tax credits or subsidies. Is he? If he can’t afford $250 a month for health insurance, what could he afford? And how can you be so sure he won’t have an accident or sudden illness exceeding $3,000 in costs? These days, a hangnail can cost that. And, under the ACA, the rich are being taxed to pay for this — that will end if Trump has his way.

  3. Tom says:

    Thanks for the satire, Mr. Lewis. It’s a touchy issue that SHOULD have been solved by a single-payer system (like medicare), but because some tiny group of individuals wants to MAKE BIG MONEY on it, they petition their (wholly owned) congress-critters with big-time lobbyists to get their way.
    Of course everyone’s rates must have to rise continually to cover these and other costs.

    Like education, finance, foreign policy, infrastructure maintenance, and many more – our “health care” system is broken (and probably unfixable).

  4. Steven Martin says:

    Its not about insurance. Insurance isn’t the answer. Coverage just means costs go up. Like tuition has gone up exhorbitantly because student loans are available. Its about medical cartels, price fixing, lack of open competition, and the cost of services. Its about being able to find out the cost before you agree to the service. The divide is emergency vs routine. The auto insurance analogy is valid in that way. When you have an accident, there is no incentive for you to seek repairs at the best value or lowest price. Thus costs are high. For routine maintenance you can shop around. That needs to be addressed separately. Karl Denninger has had a good series of articles. Here’s one.

  5. Arnold Allison says:

    The whole subject is weird. They passed a law to accept the final law that was not even near finished!? No wonder it is not accepted. My personal comment is that at the very end of human life a dog or a cat get better treatment! It is very expensive to go thru multiple medical operations just to get out of Satan’s world.
    Arnie A.

  6. Mike Kay says:

    Missing from this review is any sense of history. Max Baucus, he who was to bring Obamacare to the USA, was confronted by a young doctor who put her practice on hold to lobby for a single payer system. He stated directly to her that single payer was not going to happen, and lo and behold, it did not.
    His chief of staff who drafted the legislation was an insurance industry executive. Yes, we can all rest assured that Baucus’ denial of single payer had nothing to do with industry collusion, and that the newly deified Obama, in his infinite wisdom, refused to bring a truly universal system to America because he knew what a raging success the industry plan would be.
    Societies that cannot adapt to challenges in a successful fashion go the way of the Dodo bird, no matter how much they love their political gods.