If this monstrosity is really a tax, then why is a filibuster-proof majority needed? Furthermore, it was originally passed as a spending bill to avoid a filibuster. So I’m not sure why commentators keep repeating that a filibuster proof majority is needed to repeal.
Repeal should not require a filibuster-proof majority if they do it the way it was passed: reconciliation. Any one tax bill per year, by Senate rule, can be done that way — and it would only require 51 votes. That would be the tact.
Full health care analysis here:
http://www.tenthamendment.net/home/universal-health-care-insurance-mandate-constitution.asp