The health care plan that Congress recently approved requires people to buy insurance. That’s the whole basis of the thing. That way, people cannot avoid insurance until they get sick or injured, and cannot thus take advantage of the new ban on turning away people with pre-existing conditions.
So, the requirement to buy insurance is a central feature of Obamacare. And, that feature will be the main target of the constitutional challenge in court.
All the same, there are some things in the new health care legislation that I like. For example, I like that health insurance will become more portable, meaning that people who leave a job will be able to keep themselves covered, and therefore will not lose coverage for a pre-existing condition. I hope that the GOP will offer a replacement health care plan, in the event that Obamacare is repealed or overturned, that includes this feature.
Here at Redstate, Erick says: "any Republican who says we will repeal and replace will themselves be replaced. We want repeal period." But National Review has a different stance: “Conservatives will be able to capitalize on the discrediting of Obamacare, however it takes place, only if they campaign this fall on a pledge to replace this government-heavy system with true reform.” I think National Review is right.
It will be interesting to see how things develop over the next few days in Congress. One thing I'm hoping for is that both houses will quickly pass legislation repeating all the stuff in the executive order that Congressman Stupak obtained from President Obama.