“Congress, long ago figured out how to write laws that were difficult, at best, to overturn. “
Not particularly difficult when you and the other federal power interest handpick and approve the “judge” of the extent of your own athoirty.
You say the Federal Constitution is fine as is, I respectfully point out that your statement belies that assment if only in its practical effect. We need some from of state level nullification & interposition to balance the greed for power of Washington D.C.
Again, see my profile for some of the tweaks I think are necessary. Much of what you raise are covered.
Not to belabor this but that is what the 10th Amendment was supposed to do. However, what we are seeing is the after-effect of passing the 17th Amendment that allows the direct election of senators.
Before passage of the 17th Amendment, senators were selected by each state legislature and appointed by the governor. This, then, creatd an environment in which the senators were beholden to the state and would aggressively defend measures that would adversely affect their state.
After passage of the 17th Amendment, senators were beholden to the individual voters and big money donors (just like the House!) that helped elect them and keep them in office. As an entity, the states took a back seat to the donors that kept senators in office. This, IMO, is why we have seen the erosion of the 10th Amendment over the years. The states haven't been particularly interested in enforcing the 10th Amendment (not that they have any particular influence over their senators) and the senators feel no obligation to the state because they are no longer beholden to the state legislature or the governor for their senate seat.