True, but the courts have held that insurance policies are not commerce. They are contracts. The Constitution does not give the federal government power over those.
You are right on with this statement.
How does ALLOWING competition across state lines become a jurisdictional issue? I could see how PREVENTING competition could be a jurisdictional issue.
My point here is that competition is natural human behavior, so allowing competition is a passive involvement, whereas preventing competiton is an active involvement.
The idea here is to discourage monopolies, which involve barriers (usually government imposed) to competition.
Can the removal of such barriers be construed as a federal jurisdictional intrusion? I would think the federal intrusion would be the imposing of the barriers in the first place.
In short, NOT removing barriers to competition across state lines is the federal intrusion.