We can compel military service (the draft), but we can't compel health insurance?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

32. Congress has the specific enumerated power to provide and maintain an effective miltary.

Given the necessary and proper clause... if that means a compulsory military is necessary to defend the United States and her interests then that is what can be done. This is also the same vein of congressional power used by the Militia Act forcing citizens to purchase a gun and military supplies for militia service.

Article I, Section. 8

The Congress shall have Power...

...

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

...

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof

But the ACA is not using congressional military powers to justify it's legitimacy... it's using the commerce clause. The problem is that the commerce clause only exists to regulate interstate/international commerce. If I choose not to purchase health insurance, then I am NOT involved in any commerce. Congress thus far in history has only excercised is right to regulate commerce that already or might exist and also affects interstate commerce. Has congress ever used the commerce clause to forcibly create commerce without a choice to opt out without penalty? In such a case, commerce did not already exist and nor would it have existed otherwise. Is such an act constitutional? Is there a slippery slope and where does it end (can congress force you to buy *anything*)? These are a few of the questions the Supreme court is answering.