:::::::::You still don't seem to be getting the point that this debate is over the wording of provisions that become effective in 2017 and the option of state waivers (Section 1332 in the bill - NOT so much Section 1501). We used properly used "penalty" when describing the law (Section 1501) in the Effective January 1, 2014 section but strayed from the law in the Effective January 1, 2017 section by referring to the waiver option (Section 1332) with the addition of some Huffington Post article and it's use of the term "individual mandate" as an example of something that can be waived. Section 1332 of the bill makes no specific mention of any particular provision just the outline of parameters that must be met to secure a waiver at that point. Section 1332 (the possible waivers starting 2017 part) makes no reference to Section 1501 (the "penalty" stuff starting 2014)  some jiblet from the Huffington Post made the association based on assumptions not yet close to playing out (i.e. no state has come out with getting a waiver as far as I know to supersede the "mandate" or whatever you want to call it).