[philman_36]

Well, there it is for all the Pollyannas around here.
Would you read my reply #21 and then explain to me how Mr. Fred can claim Congress can "deny it’s a tax during debate" after what the Solicitor General said in Court?

Doesn't it seem pretty clear from his comments that Congress, on both sides of the aisle, knew they were addressing a tax, no matter what it was called?

[philman_36]

Here's another article with things more closely laid out...

@It Was Always a Tax
In part...Mr. President, the bill before us is clearly an appropriate exercise of the commerce clause. We further believe Congress has power to enact this legislation pursuant to the taxing and spending powers.

Snip...House Democrats likewise argued that Obamacare is constitutionally justified as an exercise of Congress’s power to levy taxes and spend money. Thus, Rep. George Miller of California said:

The bill contains an individual mandate to either obtain health insurance or pay a penalty. This provision is grounded in Congress’s taxing power but is also necessary and proper–indeed, a critical linchpin–to the overall effort to reform the health care market and bring associated costs under control throughout interstate commerce.

A really good article, IMO.
Be sure to read this...

The brief that administration lawyers filed on behalf of President Obama argued at length that the mandate is a tax. At risk of boring our readers, I am going to reproduce that entire section of the brief. You shouldn’t feel obliged to read it all, but it is actually quite interesting:
II. THE MINIMUM COVERAGE PROVISION IS INDEPENDENTLY AUTHORIZED BY CONGRESS’S TAXING POWER
A. The Minimum Coverage Provision Operates As A Tax Law

Is Mr. Fred right that it wasn't covered in debate??