Final answer:
The statement claiming that the necessary and proper clause of the U.S. Constitution limits the power of the national government is false. This clause has historically been used to broaden the scope of congressional authority and permit legislative action in various areas not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement is false. The necessary and proper clause, also known as the elastic clause, is part of Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution. Rather than limiting, this clause has actually been used to expand the power of the national government by granting Congress the authority to pass all laws necessary and proper for carrying out the enumerated list of powers. The clause allows Congress to exercise powers not explicitly named in the Constitution but are deemed necessary to implement the powers that are. Hence, it has played a role in the broadening of Congress's abilities to legislate in areas that are not directly mentioned within the enumerated powers.
Historically, the interpretation of the necessary and proper clause has been a significant factor in the development of federal power. Cases such as McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819 reinforced the notion that the clause affords Congress a wide latitude in exercising its powers. The decision in this case, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, confirmed the supremacy of federal legislation over state laws and supported the broad use of the necessary and proper clause.
Therefore, when it comes to the extent of national government powers, the necessary and proper clause has been instrumental in providing a constitutional foundation for a strong and adaptable federal government. This clause forms one of the cornerstones of federal authority allowing adaptation and growth beyond the original text of the Constitution.