(This post is in regards to the US Constitution and the Federal Government’s size. I wrote it as a comment elsewhere and am re-posting it here.)
I want to pass a Constitutional amendment that restricts the “Commerce Clause”, as it is called.
Basically, the Commerce Clause says that ‘Congress … shall have to power to regulate trade amongst the States.” The Supreme Court has ruled that this means that the FedGov can be involved in what a person grows on their own private property. The argument was that because the item grown (wheat) was possibly going to be traded amongst the States, the FedGov had the power to regulate (e.g. control) it. I disagree with this.
My take on the CC is that the FedGov should be involved in regulating *how* trade amongst the States, not *what* is traded. I think that the CC was intended to prevent trade wars between the States – that is, a tariff on items from one state by another state.
If one thinks long – really long – and hard about what Congress is involved in at the local level because of this interpretation of the Commerce Clause, it becomes apparent that a lot of their programs would become unconstitutional. With this little wording change, the FedGov would be barred from being involved in many, many areas that they have assumed dominion over now. The impact would be a tremendous downsizing of the FedGov.
We would gain some freedom back.
Give it some thought.
But wheat makes me sick! Yay Commerce Clause!
(j/k)
LOL!
Right with you on this one. During my year in law school, nothing sickened me more than tracking the history of how the commerce clause was used to make the Federal Government’s reach almost limitless.