Where does that argument end then?
You're view of the commerce clause would allow the federal govt to control nearly every aspect of our lives, as I cant think of any activity that doesnt in some way involve commerce. The house i live in, my job, my car, my computer, this website, the internet. You really think that was the intent of the founders, to give congress nearly unlimited power?
Well first it ends with the bill of rights, and I would be open to expanding that bill of rights to include certain things about what can and cannot be put into and taken out of your own body. I'm willing to listen to more ideas if anybody would like to offer them.
There's also the reality that something has to be able to cause an impact across state lines in some way, and you'll need the majority of the states to consider it a problem worth regulating.
But other than that it ends when the majority of Americans agree that certain things don't really need to be regulated. At least not at that level. People like you seem to forget that this is a democracy. We're not ruled by a king or a dictator who can do whatever he wants. At least not unless right wing nuts in this country find a way to install Trump permanently that is. Our government is elected for the people, by the people. So when you bitch about the government whether you like it or not you're bitching about your neighbors. The people you live with and interact with on a daily basis. Every where you go you see people who want you to have decent health insurance because if you get in a car accident they want to make sure that you can afford to pay your doctors to save your life so that they don't have to bail you out unless you truly need it.
Even if you believe the Federal Government shouldn't have this power there is no doubt that states, cities, and local governments do. I always find it hilarious how wealthy right wing assholes bitch about the government while simultaneously choosing to live in gated communities with ridiculously stringent HOA's governing everything from where they can store their trash can to whether or not they can put a basketball hoop in their driveway.
Even now there are right wing state governments passing laws preventing individual cities within their borders from passing their own local regulations like raising the minimum wage even though that shouldn't effect anybody but the people that live within those cities.
Our founding fathers did not revolt because they didn't want taxes or regulations. They simply wanted representation so that the citizens themselves had a say in what was taxed and regulated. When they spoke of freedom they didn't mean endless freedom to do whatever the hell you wanted whenever you wanted to do it, they simply meant the freedom for the people to decide for themselves what truly needed regulating and what didn't.
Unfortunately or fortunately depending on how you look at it the world is getting smaller and smaller by the day, and technological advances are bringing us all closer and closer together. That does mean that more of the things you do with your life will have an impact on the lives of others, and we as a society will have to continually asses to what level of impact another person is allowed to have on another before it's too much.
You're welcome to add your opinion to that discussion, but if you want some catch all piece of the constitution to automatically win you these arguments no matter how many people disagree with you it's not actually there.
