What I find uncomfortable is that Congress has (IMHO unconstitutional) precedent on their side in three different ways they can sell this.
1) Precedent says that congress can tax whatever it wants however it wants so long as it doesn’t interfere with a specifically enumerated right - of which healthcare is not one. This is NOT what the framers had in mind, but that’s how it’s been interpreted for the past century.
2) Precedent does nothing to stop congress from imposing conditions on states to implement state-level regulations on things that the federal government can’t regulate in order to receive federal funds for unrelated programs. States have become so dependent on the federal government - unlike what the framers intended - that they have little choice but to go along.
3) Precedent takes a very broad reading of the commerce clause, wherein if any part of the subject matter in question crosses state lines, the federal government has the right to regulate it. Again, NOT what the framers intended, but it is precedent. Since patients and doctors do travel across state lines at times to get coverage, and healthcare affects interstate commerce, it would be affected by this overly-broad reading in precedent. The Rehnquist court helped narrow it (by ruling that a bill that banned bringing guns onto school grounds was unconstitutional), they still agreed that “Congress is empowered to regulate and protect the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, or persons or things in Interstate Commerce, even though the threat may come only from intrastate activities”. Even the Rehnquist court upheld a federal law banning medicinal marijuana, overriding California’s law on the subject, under the commerce clause - even though the marijuana was being grown and consumed solely within the state. Speaking of drugs, previously they were banned via a tax - see method #1. They’re currently banned using a commerce clause justification.
Basically, I have little hope for these lawsuits. By all means, fight the good fight though. If we’re really lucky, SCOTUS will overrule precedent. But I’m not optimistic. And I’m not optimistic for repeal, either. Barry is president for three more years (PLEASE just three...). We’re not going to get a 2/3rds vote in the senate; let’s not kid ourselves. Add on to that the time it takes to pass a repeal. By then, people are already going to be dependent on the handouts — the very thing that’s made it so hard to repeal medicare, medicaid, and social security. I just don’t see it happening.
Really, I’m just depressed about it all.
I am so sorry to say that I agree with you.