the feds suing the states....WTF????
 

Maybe it's just me, but didn't we have all kinds of debates and conventions to make sure the central government didn't become 'all-powerful'???

Feds sues Missouri state officials over AT&T suit

Is THIS the latest attack on states rights? to sue them in to insolvency?

Isn't the state in a way, attacking the fed's right to protect the national security in the first place?

We did have debates to ensure that the federal government doesn't become all powerful but we've also had a debate to ensure that the state government doesn't enroach the rights of the federal government. It's a matter of drawing the line somewhere and this is one of them. Personally, I think this is a federal matter and that the state shouldn't have stick their nose in it. National security is a federal matter and why is the state government getting involved in the first place?

The major problem is that the government, central or state, has no rights. They have enumerated powers, the states supposing to have more than the central. If the central/federal government is violating the constitution then I would think that the states have every authority, under the power of the people, to intervene.

This harkens back to when Celeste in '84 said he refused Reagan's order to raise the drinking age from 19 to 21. Louisianna's governor at the time did also.

Reagan's reply?

Reagan decided to cut ALL funding into Ohio, no highway funds, no education funds (including subsidized loans), nothing but welfare and SS (because people's lives depended upon them ...or Reagan didn't want to upset too many voters in an election year).

Anyway, Celeste told everyone how Reagan was blackmailing the state and the outcry wasn't there at all. So there went our state's right to govern itself on age to drink and the feds gained that much more power.

I have a feeling Missouri will see a similar blackmail and fate before this goes to trial.

while that may be 'blackmail', your state STILL had a choice. It would have hurt, but it was still a choice.

Not really much of a choice, as long as your state is heavily dependant on Fed money, the Fed can and will make your state bow to their wishes. If withholding the funding doesn't work, there are other ways to make the state acquiesce power to the Fed.

people need to be informed, pay attention and fight back for their rights. Hopefully, Missouri can, but I have a feeling when the Fed tightens the screws you will never hear of this again.

If the state(s) do not want to be dependant on federal money, then that state legislature needs to change its budget.

If the Fed suddenly gonna tax Missouri (or it's residents) less?
No?
Sounds like blackmail to me.
How about extortion? The x makes it sound sexy.:icare:

Exactly.... the Fed is still going to tax the citizens of Missouri the same just as they did in Ohio...... they just refused to put the money back into the state.

If a state's citizens are taxed federally, they have as much right as any other state to use that money.... and for the Fed to withhold that money because they cannot legally change a law that state's citizens voted for or because they do not like the way that state is run..... is wrong and a way of manipulating their power.