OK, let's suppose HCR is ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court (or at least the individual mandate). Fine. Insurance companies still can't discriminate against pre-existing or chronic conditions. That part passes constitutional muster. So what happens then if we do nothing? Premiums will skyrocket. Everybody will be screaming their premiums are too high, and even insurance companies will have to narrow their profit margins in response to political pressures.
At that point everybody, including insurance company lobbyists, will pressure congress to do something about premiums. Even teabaggers will be afraid to repeal the politically popular anti-discrimination provisions (Rand Paul said he would vote against repealing the Civil Rights Act). So congres will have to come up with a new funding formula for HCR which does not involve an individual mandate. My guess is this will increase pressure for some sort of public option, an expansion of medicaid and/or medicare, or else congress will have to increase taxes elsewhere in order to subsidise private insurance premiums.
Whatever, aside from the individual mandate, it seems the rest of HCR will remain intact, and those are the parts that are most popular politically. Even teabags will be squeezed by their constituents and lobbyists into doing something about premiums. They won't be able to avoid the issue by talking in vague generalities about "death panels" and the constitution. And not every Republican is a teabagger. There are still enough sober GOPers left with sense enough to realize their political futures are at stake if they don't come up with an alternative funding method for HCR.
Finally, this will be an issue that will be front and center in 2012. Assuming the Supreme Court throws out the individual mandate (I expect the usual 5 to 4 majority) this will give Obama and Democrats the chance to blame someone else for a change for rising insurance premiums. They can bash the Supreme Court throughout the election cycle for dramatically rising insurance costs, and let voters render the final verdict on the issue.