The "original intent" was that the "general welfare" clause was NOT an unlimited grant of power to the federal government over anything and everything that could be considered to be related to the "general welfare."
And on that point, the Constitution is not silent, nor are the men who drafted it. Thomas Jefferson called it "sophistry," as I mentioned earlier, to say that it is.
“The “original intent” was that the “general welfare” clause was NOT an unlimited grant of power”
No matter how many times you repeat that deceptive little fewmet of anti-reason, it will never become valid. No matter how many times you insist that the parrot is resting, it is dead.
No “unlimited grant of power” is required for a *limited* exercise of power. You are hoping that people won’t notice that drug prohibition is not in any way an “unlimited” exercise of power.
Most of us, though, understand that, and do not confuse a limited exercise of power with an unlimited exercise.