Good post (annoying spelling errors notwithstanding) here on the individual mandate and the concept of a federal government of enumerated powers.
Special kudos to this:
While taxes may have a regulatory purpose,...is there truly no limitation on Congress' ability to coerce through taxation what it cannot do through regulation? Should Congress really be able to take, as is the case here, up to two percent of a person's income because [he] has failed to do what Congress cannot compel [him] to do?
It will be tragic because the notion of a Congress limited by the scope of its enumerated powers will have finally suffered the coup de grace. The Bill of Rights (once famously - and now ironically - thought to be unnecessary given the structural limits on the power of the national government) will become the only limitation on the power of Congress. If Congress can require you to buy health insurance because of the ways in which your uncovered existence effects [sic] interstate commerce or because it can tax you in an effort to force you to do anything old thing it wants you to, it is hard to see what - save [for] some other constitutional restriction - it cannot require you to do - or prohibit you from doing.
My one point of disagreement with the author: He implies that the continuation of Obamacare is not in itself tragic, despite his acknowledgment that it will probably "do more harm than good" and lead to a single-payer system.
Otherwise, a useful article concerning just one of the things that some of us are going on about when we refer to the disastrous nature of the recent bill.
HT: James Allen