From my limited understanding of the US Constitution, I thought that the Federal government was kind of like an outsourced provider of services to the member states when they want to present a single front to the rest of the world.
All of the checks and balances put into place were supposed to prevent this organisation from getting too big for their boots - hence why they are trying to change the nature of the contract and take over.
If this is true, then the member states are able to re-set the terms of the agreement or even just sack the Federal government and present themselves to the world as a sovereign state in their own right.
From my limited understanding of the US Constitution, I thought that the Federal government was kind of like an outsourced provider of services to the member states when they want to present a single front to the rest of the world.
All of the checks and balances put into place were supposed to prevent this organisation from getting too big for their boots - hence why they are trying to change the nature of the contract and take over.
If this is true, then the member states are able to re-set the terms of the agreement or even just sack the Federal government and present themselves to the world as a sovereign state in their own right.
I'm happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.