A comment on my comment.

In my last post, I made a quick update in the comments when I looked something up for a friend...

I just looked up the tax a buddy will have to pay because he chooses to not have medical insurance. It's in Title 5, Subtitle A, Part 1, Subpart A, SEC 501, Part VIII, Subpart A, SEC59B. wow.
The answer is 2.5% of income, BTW. That's right, you will now be required by law to buy a product or face a punishment. This is the first time this has ever happened in America. *facepalm*

...and today there is a story about how some organizations and lawmakers will be challenging this concept as unconstitutional.

On the first issue, Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., on Tuesday renewed the call to examine the constitutionality of whether the federal government can require Americans to purchase a product. "I don't believe Congress has the legal or moral authority to force this mandate on its citizens," Ensign said in a statement, raising what's known as a "constitutional point of order." Such procedural challenges are rare and typically lead to a vote. The non-profit Fund for Personal Liberty, as well as a Virginia-based group called the 10th Amendment Foundation, already have threatened to file suit in federal court over this issue if the health care bill passes.

The Constitution allows Congress to tax, borrow, spend, declare war, raise an army and regulate commerce, among other things. Proponents of the insurance mandate point to the Commerce Clause in arguing that Congress is within its rights to require health insurance and dismiss such potential legal challenges. But foes say the across-the-board requirement is too broad.
"I personally do not believe the Congress has the authority to enact an individual mandate requiring a person to purchase a product from a private seller," said Kent Masterson Brown, lead counsel with The Fund for Personal Liberty. "I don't think the power is there. This is not regulating anything." He said his group would be joined by the Washington Legal Foundation in filing suit against the health care bill.
Even though Obama argues that the mandate is similar to laws requiring drivers to obtain auto insurance, opponents cite several key differences. First, the auto insurance mandate is avoidable, since anyone who doesn't want to pay doesn't have to drive. Second, auto insurance is mandated in large part so that drivers carry liability insurance to cover damages to other people and cars -- not themselves. Third, auto insurance regulation occurs at the state level.
-Health Care Bill Could Face String of Legal Challenges