…to Obamacare’s individual mandate provision, without ever once explaining why there’s a constitutional challenge to the individual mandate?
Here you go. In the interests of educating the populace – even those poor unfortunates who are stuck getting their news from The New York Times. God help them – here’s the central argument: forcing individuals to engage in commercial activity is not a Constitutionally enumerated right of Congress. Buying health insurance is a commercial activity. Proponents argue that the Commerce Clause applies, but if it does then frankly the Tenth Amendment is meaningless. The Ninth, for that matter. This would, of course, shock the life out of the Federalists and the anti-Federalists, given that these Amendments were explicitly ratified to reassure the latter that there would be clear limits to governmental power in the new Republic.
No, I am not going to explain any of those terms: if you have to ask what any of them mean, then you are not qualified for participation in this conversation.
Anyway, via RCP.
PS: Almost forgot: yes, most locales require you to buy car insurance if you wish to operate a car. Guess what? There’s no federal mandate requiring citizens to own a car. That means that car ownership is ultimately a choice – unlike, say, breathing. That means that the analogy is too tenuous to succeed.