[robertpaulsen]

Easy, boy, you're frothing.

Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce. That's a fact.

You asked me if congress should have that regulatory power. I said yes.

If congress passes a law, and the courts concur, defining a specific activity (not any activity) that affects interstate commerce, congress has the right, IMO, to enforce that law under the commerce clause.

[Ken H]

Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce. That's a fact.

Ageed.

You asked if Congress should have that regulatory power.

No. I did not ask that.

I asked if Congress should have the power to regulate an intrastate activity that does or can affect interstate commerce.

You answered yes to that question. That is where you supported an expansive view of the Commerce Clause.

Just about any personal activity could affect interstate commerce, like growing vegetable gardens or a small family business.

You're saying the Federal government would be within its rights to regulate such activities if it chooses to do so.

That is a liberal interpretation of the scope and limits of the Federal government.

[tacticalogic]

Easy, boy, you're frothing.

Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce. That's a fact.

You asked me if congress should have that regulatory power. I said yes.

Ken's not frothing, he's dead on point. You stated flatly that you believe that you believe Art. I Sec. 8 grants Congress the power to regulate not only actual interstate commerce, but anything that might affect interstate commerce.

And I believe that statement is going to come back to bite you in the butt, over and over again.