National Power versus 10th Amendment

The 10th Amendment provides: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."   

In my opinion, the 10th Amendment is the source of more real liberty than the rest of the Bill of Rights added together. It protects the right of the people in the states to be governed locally (by their friends and neighbors in the state legislature) rather than remotely in the District of Columbia by Congress and the deep bureaucratic state.

 I want to make sure that you all understand what we talked about yesterday when I observed that those who argue for broad interpretations of federal power create a zero sum game between the national government and the reserved powers and liberties of we the people in the states under the 10^th Amendment. To add power to the national government under an expansive interpretation of the Necessary and Proper Clause or the Commerce Clause is to subtract the power and liberty protected the 10th Amendment.

So, suppose you were arguing on behalf of the national government for an expansive interpretation of say the Commerce Clause, and a Justice asked you "Counsel, how would this interpretation affect the scope of the 10th Amendment?" 

What would your answer be? 

Now suppose you were arguing against the expansion of national power. Now what would your answer be?