Notice also in the bill all the references to “interstate commerce” ... that is the hammer the Feds are going to beat us to death with. The government has successfully argued that even when commerce doesn’t cross state lines it can “effect” interstate commerce, and they therefore have a right to get their greasy mitts on it.
Yes- probably because the House will insist that the bill include a Constitutional justification.
Wicard v. Filburn is even more insidious than that; it posits that goods which are never entered into ANY market, whether purchase or trade/barter, fall under the Commerce Clause... that is to say that private property itself, something not technically a 'good', falls under such regulation.