Obamacare: the Healthcare Argument Explained

During the American presidential election of 2008 ‘Change’ seemed to be in the air.   In fact this was such the case that then Presidential Candidate Barrack Hussain Obama, Junior offered to the American people his vision of a new form of healthcare that he would strongly support if he had the chance to do so as ‘President of the United States of America’.   This was much more than a bland campaign promise that the American people hear at almost every presidential campaign as soon to be President Barrack Hussain Obama, Jr. would prove to be a man of his word in this fundamental ‘change’ to impact America.
Fast Forward to the year 2010 and this major piece of legislation is now signed into law.   While this was a large law, measuring approximately 400,000 words, and weighing in at about 19 pounds, it was almost immediately questioned by some Americans holding an extremely small document in comparison, the Constitution of the United States of America.   This large piece of legislation would be labeled ‘Obamacare’ by some, as it was a masterpiece achieved under the presidency of President Barrack Hussain Obama Jr.  
Opponents of the Healthcare law hold that the Individual Mandate is not supported by Article I, Section VIII, Clause III of the Constitution; also known as the Commerce clause of the constitution.   To understand this argument it is first necessary to look at what the Commerce clause of the Constitution really states.   “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”   Therefore, the Federal government is afforded the right to regulate all commerce that crosses state borders, as well as among nations and with ‘Indian’ or to be more politically correct Native American tribes.  
In order for the federal government then to have the right to regulate, a function previously held by the states they must show that interstate commerce has taken place.   This was the view that was held for some 150 years of the...