What is the Commerce Clause and Why is it Important?

“Wickard was a wheat farmer in Illinois and Filburn was the Secretary of Agriculture. In order to maintain wheat prices, Congress had instituted price supports for Wheat markets, along with quotas for growing wheat. Wickard was not only growing wheat for market, but he also grew an extra acre of wheat to harvest to give to his wife to grind into flour to make bread for the Wickard family. The Department of Agriculture, tasked to enforce the wheat quotas, asserted that the acre of wheat Wickard grew for his family was a violation of the quotas.

Wickard sued. The Department of Agriculture claimed that Congress had commerce clause authority under the Constitution to prohibit Wickard’s practice of growing wheat for his family. Even though it was admitted that the wheat Wickard grew for his family never left the farm, the Department of Agriculture claimed that this practice affected interstate commerce. If Wickard had not given this wheat to his wife, the government argued, it might have traveled across a state line and could have affected interstate commerce. Further, the government argued, if Wickard had not given farm-grown wheat to his wife to feed the family, his wife would have bought bread at the store – bread that might have crossed a state line and might have affected interstate commerce.

Thus, the government argued, Congress had sufficient constitutional authority under the commerce clause to impose the wheat quotas on Wickard and prohibit him from growing extra wheat to feed his family.

…the [Supreme] Court upheld the government’s arguments in Wickard, thereby dramatically expanding the power of Congress to “regulate commerce … among the states.””

As you can see the clause in the bill HR875
“in any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction SHALL BE PRESUMED TO EXIST.”

means ALL growing of food even that grown on you own land and consumed by your family could be regulated if this clause is added to a food safety bill.

In the case of the Animal Welfare Act the clause was added as an amendment several years later. That is the danger with ANY law and the infamous “Commerce Clause”

However, what Ifound in researching things on this visit was this in 9CFR:

http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/381-1-definitions-19611982

Commerce. Commerce means commerce between any State, any territory, or the District of Columbia, and any place outside thereof; or within any territory not organized with a legislative body, or the District of Columbia.

Read more: http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/381-1-definitions-19611982#ixzz0vnJh1JzV

Which is really somewhat more intriguing as it seems the we, as people, not being states, territories or DC or a ‘place’ would be incapable of participating in commerce…However, should we receive PIN’s, or sell to one of the delineated ‘places’, like school lunch programs, it seems we might be capable of achieving commerce by the applicable definition in this section of the CFR.

It sure as heck is interesting. And I am waiting on the protocol on the Dept of Ag complaints. It would seem that there should be constraints on public servants though.

Sorry about the html…

This is going to be addressed by many…Stay tuned. BTW, we don’t have any local tv. I’d have to write it for local papers, and will when I have a little more, but they are a dicey proposition.

I am a regular guest on The Power Hour now, and will be on Monday August 9th from 9-10 Central. We’ll be discussing this and raids that are happening all over the nation Monday.

Thanks all!

I was wondering did you give them the Pubic Servant Questionaire to fill out? Could they be getting ready to do a sting of some sort. Have you called your local newspaper or tv news to let them know what’s up?