The Commerce Clause: Route to Omnipotent Government

http://www.fff.org/freedom/0895g.asp ^ | August 1995 | Sheldon Richman

[Roscoe]

Did he say anywhere here that the interpretation given in the Federalist is of less value?

You already admitted there was no conflict, so why the smoke?

[inquest]

Actually, I didn't take a position one way or the other as to whether there's a conflict. But since you say there's no conflict, then you must agree with Madison's Federalist definition of "regulating trade". Well, that's great. I'm still at a loss as to why you brought up the 1828 letter about protective tariffs (which apply to Congress' power over foreign commerce, not interstate commerce), but if it made you feel better posting it, then more power to you.

So, as I pointed out before, regulating trade or commerce meant to them, regulation of the movement of items intended for sale, as the states are competent to handle the regulation of the actual business transactions.

I look forward to your next beside-the-point point.

[Roscoe]

You dishonestly and unsuccessfully tried to pass off a statement about Madison regarding a percieved limitation of the Articles of Confderation as his definition of "regulating trade". Confronted with his actual definition, you inanely and repeatedly blew smoke about the first statement being more "authoritative".

[inquest]

You dishonestly and unsuccessfully tried to pass off a statement about Madison regarding a percieved limitation of the Articles of Confderation as his definition of "regulating trade".

You're obviously hoping that anyone reading this has a really short attention span. His definition of "regulating trade" came in the second sentence of his paragraph. As I pointed out to you already. As you conveniently ignored. Again.

And by the way, he didn't define the phrase in his 1828 letter. He simply stated that trade regulation "embraced" (i.e. included) the goal of encouraging domestic manufacture. "A includes B" doesn't mean "B includes A".

[Roscoe]

And now you're back to invention.

His actual definition, as opposed to your faslehood:

1. The meaning of the Phrase "to regulate trade" must be sought in the general use of it, in other words in the objects to which the power was generally understood to be applicable, when the Phrase was inserted in the Constn.

2. The power has been understood and used by all commercial & manufacturing Nations as embracing the object of encouraging manufactures. It is believed that not a single exception can be named.

[inquest]

That's exactly what I just quoted from, Sherlock. No comprehensive definition in there, just an aspect of the definition. IOW, what it "embraced".

A, B, logic...

[Roscoe]

No comprehensive definition in there

No limitation to transportation in there. You failed again.

[inquest]

Like it's supposed to be my problem that the limitation to transport wasn't found in the non-comprehensive definition that you provided. It was found in Federalist #42, where Madison stated that the regulation of trade was something that an intermediate state is capable of doing to its neighbors. It's also found in Madison's follow-up letter to Campbell, which I'm sure you've read since it's located right on the same site that you got your first letter from. Here's the entire text that was provided:

For a like reason, I made no reference to the "power to regulate commerce among the several States." I always foresaw that difficulties might be started in relation to that power which could not be fully explained without recurring to views of it, which, however just, might give birth to specious though unsound objections. Being in the same terms with the power over foreign commerce, the same extent, if taken literally, would belong to it. Yet it is very certain that it grew out of the abuse of the power by the importing States in taxing the non-importing, and was intended as a negative and preventive provision against injustice among the States themselves, rather than as a power to be used for the positive purposes of the General Government, in which alone, however, the remedial power could be lodged.

[Roscoe]

limitation to transport wasn't found in the non-comprehensive definition

And demolished by it.

[inquest]

Non sequitur. A non-comprehensive definition, unless it directly contradicts the limitation referred to, can't demolish it.

[Roscoe]

A non-comprehensive definition

The greater the reach of the definition, the less true your invented limition becomes.

[inquest]

Ain't it a shame that wishful thinking on your part can't expand the reach of the definition. Especially after Madison made it explicitly clear that this "reach" you refer to in no possible way applies to Congress' power over interstate commerce.

By the way, in case you haven't figured it out yet, you have nowhere to go from here.

[Roscoe]

Beg that question.

[inquest]

There's no question left to beg, except in your mind. Madison made himself perfectly clear.

[Roscoe]

Indeed he did.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Justice Thomas went on to state that under the substantially affects interstate commerce test adopted by the Court, "[c]ongress can regulate whole categories of activities that are not themselves either 'interstate or commerce.'"

The latest example is the Partial Birth Abortion Ban which Congress is about to pass. It is based on, you guessed it, the Commerce Clause. But I'll bet no "conservatives" take exception to it.

[gcruse]

It is based on, you guessed it, the Commerce Clause. But I'll bet no "conservatives" take exception to it.

I didn't know that.  I'm pro-choice, but PBA is murder.  If we have to rely on bogus commerce to prohibit murder,  the Republic is a joke poorly told.  As for putting 'conservatives' in quotes, sad to say that's true. 

[Lurking Libertarian]

If we have to rely on bogus commerce to prohibit murder, the Republic is a joke poorly told.

There are no federal laws against murder (except in federal enclaves not subject to state law, like Washington, D.C. or on ships on the high seas, etc.). The PBA bill bans partial birth abortions "in or affecting commerce," defined as any BBA performed using medical supplies which crossed a state line. I kid you not.

[gcruse]

Incredible.

[inquest]

And you're just as perfectly determined to ignore his words.