I Donated to Trump's Super PAC, Got a Private Meeting, and Received Exactly the Regulatory Rollback I Wanted—This Is How Democracy Is Supposed to Work
"Executives who donated to the president's super PAC met privately with him and urged a repeal of the rule, which was intended to prevent neglect of patients." —News reports, January 2025
As the CEO of a multi-state nursing home corporation, I'm proud to say that I believe deeply in the democratic process. That's why, after contributing a substantial sum to President Trump's super PAC, I was granted a private audience with the President himself to discuss my concerns about burdensome federal regulations. And this week, I'm thrilled to report that the administration revoked the Biden-era rule requiring minimum staffing levels in nursing homes.
This is representative democracy at its finest.
Now, some radical leftists are claiming that this is somehow "corruption" or "pay-to-play politics." But that's absurd. I didn't buy policy changes—I simply exercised my First Amendment right to spend unlimited money supporting candidates who happen to share my deeply held belief that nursing homes should be allowed to operate with whatever staffing levels maximize shareholder returns. The fact that I received a private meeting and got exactly what I wanted within weeks is merely a happy coincidence that demonstrates how responsive our government is to concerned citizens (who can afford six-figure political donations).
Critics point out that the now-repealed rule was designed to ensure that vulnerable elderly patients receive adequate care and aren't left sitting in soiled bedding for hours because there aren't enough nurses on duty. But what these critics fail to understand is that this rule represented government overreach of the highest order. Who is the federal government to tell me how many employees I need to hire? That's a decision that should be left to the free market (and also to me, specifically, because I own the nursing homes).
The previous administration claimed that understaffing leads to preventable deaths, bedsores, malnutrition, and untreated medical emergencies. But where's their evidence? Sure, there are thousands of citations, investigative reports, and peer-reviewed studies documenting exactly this—but have they considered the impact on my profit margins? I didn't think so.
Some bleeding hearts argue that my facilities have already been cited for neglect violations. They point to incidents where residents fell and weren't discovered for hours, or where medications weren't administered on time, or where call buttons went unanswered. But these isolated incidents (occurring regularly across multiple facilities in multiple states) are simply the cost of efficiency. You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs (or leaving a few octogenarians unattended for extended periods).
The beauty of the free market is that families can simply choose a different nursing home if they're unsatisfied with the care. Never mind that most families have already spent down their loved one's life savings, that Medicare and Medicaid limit which facilities they can access, or that my company owns fourteen of the sixteen nursing homes within a fifty-mile radius of most major metropolitan areas in our operating region. Choice is what makes America great.
Frankly, I'm tired of the double standard. When ICE detains thousands of immigrants without providing them with court-ordered bond hearings—to the point where a federal judge ordered the ICE director to appear personally to explain the "extraordinary" violations—everyone calls it lawlessness. But when I operate nursing homes without adequate staff, it's just good business. Where's the consistency?
And let's talk about government efficiency. The Trump administration understands that regulations are strangling American businesses. Just look at how they've streamlined disaster relief—by adding so many extra layers of review at FEMA that $17 billion in aid is now bottlenecked while disaster-struck communities wait. That's the kind of lean, efficient government that allows businesses like mine to thrive (by cutting corners on patient care).
The radical left wants to impose "socialized medicine" and government control over healthcare. But I believe in the American system, where healthcare decisions are made by the free market (meaning me and my fellow executives who meet privately with the President after making large donations). This is the system the Founders envisioned (if you ignore everything they wrote about preventing corruption and wealthy interests from capturing government).
I'm committed to providing quality care to our nation's elderly. It's just that my definition of "quality" is necessarily constrained by my fiduciary duty to maximize returns for our private equity investors. And thanks to this administration's commitment to regulatory relief, I can now provide that care with even fewer nurses, aides, and support staff than before.
This is what draining the swamp looks like: removing burdensome regulations that prevent businesses from operating efficiently, even if that efficiency occasionally results in preventable patient deaths. The free market will sort it out.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to tour some premium assisted living facilities for my own mother. I'm looking for somewhere with excellent staffing ratios—you can't be too careful with the elderly.
This Week's Inspiration
The stories that made this satire possible:
- After Donations, Trump Administration Revoked Rule Requiring More Nursing Home Staff — Nytimes
- Judge orders ICE chief to appear in court to explain why detainees have been denied due process — Apnews
- There's no way to normalize Trump's attacks on democracy — Thehill
- The Supreme Court could bring Texas-style gerrymandering to your state — Thehill
- The facts are in: Trump’s return-to-office mandate backfired — Thehill
- Judge Orders ICE Chief to Appear in Court Over Potential Contempt — Nytimes
- Live updates: Senate returns amid DHS funding uproar as shutdown deadline looms — Thehill
- Extra Scrutiny of FEMA Aid to States Has Created a $17 Billion Bottleneck — Nytimes
- ICE chief ordered to appear in Minnesota federal court, judge threatens contempt ruling — Cnbc
- Minneapolis mayor says Trump 'agreed the present situation can't continue' — Thehill
Week of January 20 - January 27, 2026