I don't."

I think that the way this possibility is "spoken for" in Ron Paul's sense of things (and I could be wrong) is to say okay, then we need to change the constitution.  Unless we do that, granting power to the federal government that it doesn't have by right of that document is what we'll have, and from that precedent we will have even more problems, such as the legislative branch subsuming a chunk of the judicial branch's proper role, and no one challenging that move.  (I'm talking about the creation of the "Office of Legal Counsel" here.)

The farther away the government is, the less involved the citizenry will be.  The less involved, the less informed/engaged.  Potentially, this works vice-versa as well . . . at least I'd like to see it attempted.

I do like reading your posts, by the way.

Herring405