[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

FEDERAL DRUG LAWS DEPEND ON EXPANDED COMMERCE POWER.
If you are in favor of federal drug laws, then you are part of the LEFT-RIGHT conspiracy to destroy the Constitution. The original commerce clause, intended only to prevent states from levying taxes on each other's products, does not and did not by all precedents before 1942 allow the federal government to regulate drugs or alcohol. The Prohibition Amendment was the result of a succession of federal attempts at intra-state regulation being struck down by pre-WWI originalist supreme courts. If you want drug laws without an amendment because that's just too hard, then you are the problem and your own worst enemy.

[grumpygresh]

Federal usurpation would be even greater with the health insurance mandates than drug laws. Not buying insurance cannot be considered commercial activity. What about the OR euthanasia laws that have resisted federal intervention. I’m with you, I’d much rather side with state laws unless federal power is specifically enumerated. I’m no fan of drug legalization, same sex marriage or euthanasia but I’d much rather have the states decide on these issues. If I don’t like a state law, I can always move to another state or work in my state to get it changed, but a bad federal law would be a disaster.
If the health insurance mandates pass, we need our Republican presidential candidates to state whether the law is constitutional and directly state whether they would direct Treasury/IRS to enforce these laws if elected!