But Cash for Clunkers appears to be another one of those constitutionally dubious programs Congress passes and adds to the deficit. The U.S. Constitution talks about regulating interstate commerce. As others have pointed out, Cash for Clunkers made the U.S. government a participant in commerce. I asked Minnick's spokesman, John Foster, to tell me the constitutional justification of Cash for Clunkers. "I didn't ask Walt that, and I am not a constitutional lawyer, so I'm not qualified to answer," Foster said. "But I think, personally, that the 316 votes in the House and 60 votes in the Senate for the program show that most members of Congress were comfortable with the constitutionality"/Wayne Hoffman, Idaho Freedom Foundation. More here.

• Monday Politics Brief/Treasured Valley
• College of Western Idaho attracts 3400 students and counting/Kevin Richert
• A 30-second difference and a wrong U-turn/Dennis Mansfield
• Defending the indefensible/Fort Boise
• Is it me? Or is Walt Minnick confused?/MountainGoat Report

Question: Do you think the Cash For Clunkers program was worth the money handed out?