I was under the impression we were trying to shrink the involvement of the Federal government. The interstate commerce clause was originally intended to clear up regulations and taxes that some states had imposed on goods from other states under the Articles of Confederation. The idea was to free up trade, not place barriers to it, and, as someone else pointed out, travel is not commerce.
I was only commenting on constitutionality not the size of the government so lets be clear about that. The contention was that there was no constitutional authority to establish the TSA. That is simply false.
Nor is it true that the Commerce clause only applied to state regulation and tazes. It was a broad grant of power. Commerce is not even possible except on a very limited basis without transportation. Only on a feudal basis, this was well understood by the Founders. It was clear that throughout history the periods of high civilization all occurred after transportation made is possible international and interregional trade. After the roads and seas had been made safe for carrying goods from country to country.
It is absurd to pretend that companies whose business is travel are not commerce or that companies whose business is moving goods from place to place are not commerce. They are controlled by COMMERCIAL law.