The point of a Constitution is that it is supposed to be taken literally; and Madison concluded that the remedy for excessive use of the federal commerce power was, in effect, Congress.
The larger issue is what Madison would make of today's use of the federal commerce clause. I think that most of it he would see as commendable or at least debatable, much of it profoundly unwise and wrong, but I do not think Madison would call the current application of the commerce clause unconstitutional. As to what he disapproved of, Madison would mostly wonder what had happened to Congress and the people.
The issue is your misunderstanding of Madison's letter to Cabell. You claimed that Madison viewed the power to regulate foreign and interstate commerce as coextensive, and that is just not so. Reread carefully and you'll see that I'm correct.
I do not think Madison would call the current application of the commerce clause unconstitutional.
Huh? You just got through saying:
The Framers of the Constitution and their generation did not intend for the vast scope of federal power today, much of it based on the commerce clause. You also said Wickard was not consistent with original intent. Madison himself said I.8.3. as applied to interstate commerce was not intended for the positive purposes of the general government.
I'm having trouble seeing the consistency in your positions.