View Single Post
Old June 17, 2009, 10:21 PM   #26
ftd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 11, 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 109
"promote the general welfare"

Quote:
OK, what other grounds? Go ahead. Look at article 1, section 8 of our Constitution and find for me the authority by which Congress might write a law like the ESA
The second (or is it actually the first?), most abused element in the Constitution, after commerce, is in the preamble. The phrase, "promote the general welfare", is, however, a reason for the Contitution, not an authority granted to the government. In many folks minds, however, it justifies the exercise of umlimited federal authority to establish the most welfare for the people owning those minds.

Original question:
Quote:
Could the United States continue as we know it if the Commerce Clause were interpreted more narrowly? If everything from the USDA to FDA to medical devices to gasoline in your fuel tank were suddenly regulated by the state instead of the Feds, would quality of life improve or would we see life become more complex and regulatory?
Some have already addressed this, but much of what the USDA, FDA, and other federal groups does is related directly to interstate commerce. Also, much of what they do is NOT related to interstate commerce. It is the latter that we really want to get rid of. Let's also throw in the Department of Agriculture which is more interested inpromoting food businesses than helping farming/farmers. The Department of Education (nothing to do with interstate commerce although justified by the commerce clause), and many, many laws and regulations.

I assume that we would face a little short term choas if we severly limited the authority of the commerce clause, but we would regain a lot of rights and freedom by doing so.
ftd is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.02630 seconds with 8 queries