[Ken H]

The power to regulate commerce among the several states [RCATSS] was different -- it was shared between the states and the federal government, although it could be lodged alone in the federal government.

The power to RCATSS was delegated to Congress. It was surrendered by the States to the general government, not shared.

"...and not as a power to be used for the positive purposes of the General Government, in which alone, however, the remedial power could be lodged."

It makes no sense. You'd have to say, "... and not as a power to be used for the positive purposes of the General Government, in which alone, however, the remedial power could not be lodged.

"and not" fits perfectly in Madison's letter. Remedial power, when used to negate or prevent an injustice among States, is not an exercise of power for the positive purposes of the general government. And Madison made such a distinction.

How can you lodge this power with the federal government and expect them to act in any way except for their positive purposes? Should they favor one state over another? Should they act for negative purposes?

The FCC regulation of broadcast frequencies and strengths is an example of negating or preventing obstructions to communication. Requiring broadcasters to provide equal time to opposing viewpoints is an example of a positive purpose, which Madison said was contrary to the original intent.

"Rather than" means that it was Madison's intent that the states themselves solve their commerce problems, rather than running to Congress every time they needed a resolution.

You're still pushing an interpretation of "rather than" as inclusive of what follows. I have provided you with biblical translations and authoritative English usage sources which say "rather than" means "and not" or "instead of".

Can you provide a source which backs your interpretation of "rather than"?

[robertpaulsen]

"The power to RCATSS was delegated to Congress. It was surrendered by the States to the general government, not shared."

It was not surrendered. You cannot find that among the other Article I, Section 10 surrendered powers.

"Remedial power, when used to negate or prevent an injustice among States, is not an exercise of power for the positive purposes of the general government. And Madison made such a distinction."

True, but only when the states themselves resolve the injustice in a court.

But if the federal government steps in to say, remove a tariff, they do so for the benefit (positive purposes) of the United States, not for the benefit of State A or State B.

"You're still pushing an interpretation of "rather than" as inclusive of what follows."

"A" rather than "B" means "A" is the expected course. It does not preclude "B". You're saying that "B" is not allowed. That's wrong.