I think that this question has already been answered by the Supreme Court of the United States of America. They ruled last year, or was it the year before, that the health care law and everything inside of it is within the bounds of our great constitution of the land.
Forced consumerism, corporate welfare. And it's different from auto insurance. You can choose not to get a car, what am I going to choose not to have a body?
It doesn't even make sense to require people to buy health insurance, because the more people buy health insurance the more profits the insurance companies have and the more health care providers can afford to charge higher prices. This is a problem with insurance in the first place. Health care prices(price of actual health care not the insurance) were a lot lower before insurance became a real thing. Instead of mandatory health insurance we should be doing the opposite and making health insurance illegal. Health insurance is not a victimless crime. Buying it means you are contributing to the inflation in price of health care services(again actual health care, not insurance although the insurance price will go up to if more people buy it). Instead of health insurance the government should have a bail-out policy where people who have health care needs they can't afford or can't afford without serious financial hardship get bailed out at least enough of the way. And if you can afford it, pay it not with insurance but with money.
How is it unconstitutional? I'm sure the framers didn't imagine giving the government the power to financially enslave citizens to private, for-profit companies. I can't believe liberals are supporting this when they're supposed to be for protecting people from corporations not in cahootz with them.
The fact that the Supreme Court had to consider the health care mandate a "tax" is reason to believe that the idea was not constitutional to begin with. The plan was not meant to be a tax, but had to be considered one in order to pass the Supreme Court and enacted into law.
Before we even venture into the arena of deliberation over “mandated individual health insurance” we need to have lengthy debate, and ultimate compromise, to the issue of “affordable” health care. By putting the proverbial cart before the horse so to speak, we will open the health industry up to even more fraud than is already plaguing the industry. Mandating health insurance is not constitutional beyond even the question of whether or not affordable health care is the norm. Mandate is the key word of consideration. Personally I think it is unconstitutional to “mandate” auto insurance, or other types of insurance for that matter. We can easily find thousands of cases of blatant fraud generated by this “state mandated” requirement. Wreck your car, cause someone else financial hardship, and you are unable to pay, then lose your driving privileges. But to mandate an individual pull money out of their pocket via a mandate of any form, to handover to the insurance leaches, should be labeled unconstitutional, and treated as such.