I'm late to this thread, so I don't know if anyone has mentioned this already, but the authors of the bill do realize they're making the case for the constitutionality of the mandate, right? There have previously been federal requirements mandating the purchase of guns by private citizens.
At one time for a segment of the population, yes. Though it is hardly analogous in breadth and scope to the insurance mandate. Forgetting the WHAT government wants to make people buy, it's just scary to me that people are defending the notion that the federal government has the authority to make a citizen buy something from another private entity.