I have a few concerns regarding the Federal Establishment.
1. The U.S. Constitution contains a clause that restricts amending specific clauses prior to the year 1808. Could congress propose an amendment stating that the clauses can be changed at anytime before, during, and after 1808? It would seem that Congress couldn't propose amendments that were contrary to the Constitution. And in a Republican form of Government, all power is derived by the people, and only with their consent can a new or expanded power be granted & Constitutional.
2. When writing the U.S. Constitution, a great deal of thought went into creating 2 houses in congress. The consideration of having popular election was understood to be fatal to liberty. James Madison warned of great corruption that would result from both sources elected by the same source. (The People) While the Senate represents the interests (commercial) of a state, and trading with foreign nations, they would likely be experienced members of the legislatures of the states in which they were elected. This is why a greater portion of the responsibility lied with them. Each House in Congress, the Executive, and the Judicial Branch are each elected from seperate sources. The intent was to ensure no elected person would feel as if they owe their election to someone, exposing them to improper influence which would endanger liberty as it did in Parliament in England.
3. The constitution allows for Congress to Coin money, not to issue paper as a legal tender. All debts and payments must be in silver or gold. The purpose was to ensure the gold standard (unrelated to the metal used in coins) was always in place to protect the people and the prosperity of the country from the same war-minded centralized bank of England, France, and even the Roman Empire. The fall of the Roman Empire was related to inflation, and the economists/wealthy bankers/tax collectors controlled the monetary policies of the time, destroying empires throughout the ages. And of course... here we are.
It seems the states in the country care very little about regaining control of a Government gone haywire. There are so many things that are supposedly changed by the amendments, when such changes required the ratification of both the states and the people. And a major principle in the Constitution is that no act of that Government shall be executed upon any state without its consent. (Article VI)
So why do we allow people to earn $16 Million in one year, when that same amount could employ 320 people at $50k per year. Corporations are established by state governments, and that makes them part of the state establishment. States used to be managed for business production, and the only catch was they must take care of their citizens/workforce. (English/Colonial Law) When the citizens are suffering while a select few continue to reward themselves with other peoples money, you can't keep turning a blind eye. something needs to be done once and for all. We hadn't experienced any depressions of significance until after the Federal Reserve was established. Imagine that. After the reserve is established, the U.S. seems to have frequent returns to a state of economic disaster.