We are building on what came before, the decision for a more powerful federal government isn't particularly new. Pooling the resources of the many states has a

We are building on what came before, the decision for a more powerful federal government isn't particularly new. Pooling the resources of the many states has a lot of benefits (and the states traditionally opposed to that benefit the most from federal dollars). > If the government breaks their end of the deal all bets are off. etc etc Those are all explicitly extra constitutional and the ones I euphemistically referred to. The methods for changing the constitution systematically within it's own rules are through Convention or Amendment. > If ruled constitutionality is different than the people's understanding of the Constitution it creates a sense of tyranny I'd be more charitable to the devolution of powers if the expressed preferred outcomes of that devolution of power didn't so often tend towards the repression of various groups. There's the OG slavery, segregation, voting rights, and the modern day antitrans/gay panics and to gut things like the voting rights act to prop up gerrymandered governments... but now we're tending towards topics that wind up [dead] due to flame wars.