Hmm, I like this approach. How about this though. When a state fucks up bad enough to need a federal bailout, and it has to be the states fault not something like a natural disaster unless the state itself either caused it or demonstrably failed to prepare for it (looking at you Texas power grid) then the federal government does the following.

First they decide how much they’re budgeting to fix the problem. Then the State needs to decide if they’re going to provide a plan to keep that problem from happening again. If the state provides a plan then the federal subsidy payments are done in installments and those installments are conditional on implementing that plan. If however the state either refuses to make a plan or doesn’t make one that’s acceptable instead that money is put into a fund that people can claim some amount of to cover expenses for moving out of that state and into another one. This could potentially go all the way up to the cost of buying a house in a different state, although they then actually have to move out of their current state including selling any property in that state or else the money gets clawed back.

This way the problem gets solved one way or another, either the state improves or else there are fewer people stuck in shitty states.