Granted, that was an interstate commerce issue, but it is evidence of a 1-8-3 power. Wickard was the only "evidence" of 1-8-3 "power". Otherwise, you could say that any statute enacted under 1-8-3 was evidence of it's power.
I don't know why anyone would cheer on an obviously flawed ruling of the SC. One may be against drugs, but going extra-constitutional to do it indicates ignorance of precedent and consequences of shortsightedness.
Did you catch this? "It held that his 239 excess bushels of wheat affected the national wheat market whether he sold it or not, since wheat he produced for his own use was wheat he didn't have to buy elsewhere."
Notice the SC reasons that if wheat producing farmers themselves were to not buy wheat, it would affect the national wheat market.
The logic of the SC in Wickard is just absurd. I'd be embarrassed to support it in any way for any reason.
You need to define what you mean by a 1-8-3 power. In my mind, a 1-8-3 power is Congress using the power of the commerce clause to write some piece of legislation regulating commerce.
I believe you're saying that a 1-8-3 power is Congress using the power of the commerce clause to write some piece of legislation regulating intrastate commerce. Yes? No?
"Notice the SC reasons that if wheat producing farmers themselves were to not buy wheat, it would affect the national wheat market."
Yes. Each farmer had a quota. That quota assumed the farmer would buy his wheat on the open market.
I suppose the legislation could have been written differently, setting a smaller "to market" quota with an unlimited "for personal use" amount. But what about those farmers who had no use or desire for wheat? They wanted to grow and sell as much as they could.
The logic of the USSC in Wickard v Filburn makes perfect sense to those who look at the complete picture.
Those, like you, who choose to think of this case as 239 bushels will never understand.
Oh, by the way, our Mr. Filburn (who was being paid three times the world price per bushel for his wheat by the federal government) was allowed to produce and consume wheat in excess of his quota. He simply had to pay a small per-bushel penalty.