We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
It seems silly to even have an argument about it. If it provided the power for Congress to regulate everything, Madison wasted a lot of time coming up with the Bill of Rights that limited the power of government.
The crime here is that Wickard v. Filburn has not been overturned (SCOTUS found Filburn was not allowed to grow wheat on his own farm for his own consumption).
readers might want to wade through the USSC's holdings in US v Morrison and US v Lopez. Morrison: violence against women had only an "attenuated" effect on interstate commerce (ISC), federal statute relying on the commerce clause partially invalidated. Lopez: federal statute criminalizing carrying guns on school grounds did not "substantially" effect ISC.
Wickard won't be overturned, the best we can hope for is a better definition of to what extent ISC has to be affected before congress can validly act.
making a strawman out of Wickard only helps the liberals. to defeat the liberal argument for extending the power of congress to regulate everything we need to really understand the underpinnings of their constitutional arguments.
most of the wheat the farmer in Wickard was growing was sold in ISC, and there was no doubt that congress could regulate the amount he could grow. the issue was the amount that the farmer grew that he held off the market for his own personal use. the reasoning of the court was that by using personal surplus, he did not have to buy wheat that was being sold in interstate commerce. presumably the net effect of all farmers doing so would have a substantial effect on ISC.
WTFrig does Congress have legislating anything of this nature? Isn't that why most people flee to the U.S. of A.? Where are people's brains when they don't study history and the results of over-legislating?