BabyBird - My point is that insurance is insurance. You can't argue that it's unconstitutional to require companies to offer HC insurance, when that very constitution already requires provided insurance in many aspects.  I agree the battle is just starting and for that many political leaders should hang their heads in shame.

Well, davie...you totally lost every inch of liberal argument and any credilibility you thought you had with this post! The issue is not about companies...can't you get that through your thick liberal skull?

The issue is about requiring private individuals to purchase corporate-owned insurance policies against their will.

See how skewed you have obviously become?

The federal government has never required all Americans to buy any good or service. An individual mandate to enter into a contract with or buy a particular product from a private party, with tax penalties to enforce it, is unprecedented and flies in the face of our founding principles and a reasonable reading of judicial precedent. Nowhere in the Constitution is Congress given the power to mandate that an individual enter into a contract with a private party or purchase a good or service and no decision or present doctrine of the Supreme Court justifies such a claim of power.

The most common argument used to justify a federal mandate to purchase health insurance is the talking point that states are allowed to force individuals to buy car insurance before they are allowed to drive. However, there is a fundamental constitutional difference between the inherent police powers of the states and the enumerated powers of the national government—not to mention that driving is a voluntary activity. You don't have to have auto insurance if you don't drive a car or don’t drive on state roads, and states require drivers to maintain auto insurance only to cover injuries to others—not themselves like an individual mandate would do. The analogy between a state mandating auto insurance for those who drive and mandatory health insurance for all is flawed at best.

Just how far does this abuse of power extend? If Congress can impose a health-insurance mandate, then there is no limit to what Congress can do, and the Constitution's limits on congressional power will have essentially been eliminated. If you follow this line of argument, given the federal government’s recent interest in bailing out the auto industry, Congress could– relying on the very argument it is using to mandate health care purchases— require every American to buy a new Chevy Impala every year to boost sales at Government Motors, or a pay a "tax" equivalent to its blue book value.

No, the argument that the feds can force a private citizen to buy personal health insurance has no precedence and fails.

Well, davie...you left posting here some 12 hours ago. I see you are now back posting. If it wasn't for my wife passing through and seeing you at work this afternoon, I'd be posting that I was wondering where you went and why you don't answer other's challenges to you here?