1. Price controls - No
2. Banning a specific good or service - If there is no genuine interstate/national element, no
3. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 - Not under interstate commerce, but can be done under Congressional enforcement of the 14th Amendment
4. Anti-trust laws - If there is no genuine interstate/national element, no
5. Minimum wage - In very limited circumstances it can apply, e.g. Long distance lorry drivers, but largely, no.
6. Coining money - Yes
7. Establishing uniform bankruptcy laws - No
8. Establishing post offices and post roads - No
9. Punishing counterfeit currency - Yes
Currency would come under the interstate commerce clause in my opinion because it is almost inevitable that money once enterred into circulation will become involved in interstate commerce, thus counterfeit will also likely become a part of this same interstate commerce. The amount of money in circulation (i.e. the amount of money coined) also has an undeniably large impact on interstate commerce and therefore is worthy of federal regulation.
6. Coining money - This is given to them at another point in the Constitution, so irrelevant (clause 5 of powers clause)
7. Establishing uniform bankruptcy laws - for interstate banks, not intrastate
8. Establishing post offices and post roads - same as 6, just uses clause 7
9. Punishing counterfeit currency - see above, clause 6
Ah, you don't seem to understand what I'm getting at. The point is that any interpretation of the commerce clause that would allow these things to be done, must be incorrect, by virtue of the fact that the framers saw fit to include them separately.
I don't agree with this argument:
Take the Bill of Rights for example - In the 5th we are told that every person has the right to due process of law. If we then examine other parts of the Bill of Rights, we find other things that we could find to be completely within due process of law, for example, the right to have Assistance of Counsel contained in the 6th Amendment. If this is not a part of the procedural due process guarantee then I do not know what is.
It is not that James Madison enjoyed repitition, far from it: The Framers wanted a broad protection (the right to due process), but were also aware of definite specific protections that they wanted in there. So, in addition to the broader protection, they also included their specific protections to ensure that even if their broader protection was reduced to an inkblot later in history, the specific protections would be near impossible to overcome.
Also, in the case of coining currency, the Founders wanted to absolutely forbid the States from doing this, so they specifically stated such in Article I Section 9. It then of course made sense to make sure that the power was granted to Congress in Section 8, even though it would have been included in the Interstate commerce power.
