secede from unionHow can a State secede from the Union? If you are responsible and balance your budget you are now required to?

bail out those States who have lived High-On-the-Hog and have run up Billions of deficits.
We aren't responsible for their narcissism, incompetence and greed. I'd rather secede from the Union than pay their debts.
Maybe let them pay for my extravagance for a change. - Oops, they can't. They want my money so they can continue their foolishness.
The states that had debt at the beginning of our financial crisis are unable to get low interest loans at this point and are unable to even come up with a budget to keep their states services going. Those who had balanced budgets are still able to continue without government loans or bailouts. This will change if unemployment gets much worse because of the money they have to pay for unemployment, food stamps, etc, and the loss of revenue from the people who reside there who can't pay or won't owe state and local taxes.
Google HCR 6, and read it completely. It is New Hampshire's resolution to secede from the US if Obama does much more of what he is trying to do., and itsecede from union explains in detail their reasoning.
Google SC and see how they did it before the Civil War. The same process would apply.

And Mass was thinking of trying. Give them a shot with Google.
The only states which have legal standing to secede are Alaska, Hawaii, Texas; whose joining the union can be viewed as illegal under international law.

Alaska has the best chance and best legal argument, because the referendum on statehood can be easily argued as rigged; and it was after UN guidelines for this sort of thing were established, as no option of independence, or status quo were offered; and non-resident US military personnel were allowed to vote in the election.

Texas was the only state in the CSA which actually had a referendum on session, which passed overwhelmingly; it also was the only state in the union (at the time) which had ever been an independent country; but the arguments that can be used have to backdate international law to 1860, when the definition of the proper procedure for dealing with a non-selsecede from unionf governing territory was established only after World War II; thus the legal principle of nula ponea sine lege can be applied, because what the United States did was not illegal at the time.

Hawaii was a constitutional monarchy, which made the mistake of allowing immigration from America to overwhelm it; and the American immigrants staged a coup to oust the monarchy; and the US subsequently annexed them. Again, because this all happened in 1898, the legal principle of nula ponea sine lege can be applied; so they are legally shaky for session.

So in other words, the only state that could secede and get away with it is Alaska; because they could go to the UN and use the arguments which I described. If they do it by popular referendum, and use those arguments (and can also somehow find problems with the original American acquisition of the territory); Alaska could successfully gain independence. Whether or not and how much bloodshed there would be is a different story...