Customer Reviews

A More Perfect Constitution: Why the Constitution Must Be Revised: Ideas to Inspire a New Generation

5 star:		(22)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

One certainly has to admire Larry Sabato whether one agrees with him or not. Anyone suggesting that the U.S. Constitution is "out of date" and in need of reform is bound to enrage many, if not most, of the millions of traditional political conservatives in this country. They not only oppose the very idea of a "living" Constitution and tend to support the view that the Constitution is just fine as it is, but are "originalists" (that is, what was the original intent of the Founders?) when it comes to interpreting the Constitution. Sabato, however, in "A More Perfect Constitution" argues that the U.S. Constitution is in need of an upgrade and he presents twenty-three proposals for its reformation. Despite the fact that the title of the book is problematic (how does one make something "more perfect" when "perfect" already means "without any defect"?), I submit that Sabato's book needs to be read by every citizen of this country who is concerned about its future. The plain truth is: The Constitution as handed down to us and in its present form does not meet the political needs of the nation as it now exists. (Sorry, my fellow political conservatives.)

Generally speaking, I think Sabato's proposals are worth considering and should be the subject of a wide-ranging public debate. (There is one of his proposals, however, which I find especially troubling and I'll get to that one in a minute.) The very calling of a constitutional convention would be controversial, to be sure, particularly in this current period of political polarization. The apparent power of so many special-interest groups today would also deter many citizens from supporting the call for a constitutional convention. Who would be the delegates? How would they be chosen? What would be the requirements? What would prohibit someone from being a delegate? How would the so-called great divide between red states and blue states play into the process? What influence would right-wing radio talk show hosts or left-wing Internet bloggers have on the delegates during the reformation process? I think these items would be of concern to most centrist-thinking Americans. But I believe they can be resolved if people are willing to use some good old American common sense (sometimes lost but not forgotten).

There is little doubt in my mind that the office of the president is due for a serious makeover. Over the past few generations the nation's president has accumulated too much power and Congress has not done an effective job of oversight as it is constitutionally required to do. Four years for the president is too short a term and eight years is too long. Sabato's recommendation of a six-year presidential term seems reasonable to me. The president also desperately needs the line-item veto as suggested by Sabato. Furthermore, there is no good reason today to maintain the prohibition against non-natural-born presidents and Sabato's recommendation of twenty years of citizenship for this office appears reasonable, although I would have suggested twenty-five years (just don't ask me why).

More important, in my opinion, is the structure of the Congress. I don't believe that the Founding Fathers intended the creation of a class of "professional politicians" who would be elected to the House or the Senate and then spend their entire life occupying a chair there, spending the bulk of their time running for reelection, becoming pawns of special-interest groups, and enriching themselves at the public trough. Therefore, term limits for Congress must be built into any new constitution. (Yes, I know all the arguments against term limits, but the arguments in favor of them are more compelling and it's not like it's a matter of some absolute fundamental political principle.) And Sabato's suggestion that the House be expanded to around 1,000 members -- for better, closer representation -- is worthy of serious consideration.

Now for the new federal courts. It is completely asinine, in my opinion, for federal judges to have lifetime appointments and especially so for the Supreme Court justices. Sabato's recommendation of a single, nonrenewable term of fifteen years for all federal judges (including the Supremes) is more than reasonable, although I would have recommended a somewhat lesser term and a definite retirement age. Expanding the size of the Supreme Court from nine to twelve, as Sabato suggests, would get my approval but I suspect that many will object to the increase, recalling FDR's attempt to "pack" the court so he could get his Depression-era policies approved. But this would not be an attempt to pack the court in the name of some special interest, but merely to create a more representative court.

As I said above, most of Sabato's proposals appear reasonable to me and some of them are much needed reforms. There is one, however, that I have to take issue with and that is his suggestion for Universal National Service (UNS), a constitutional requirement that all U.S. citizens of sound mind and body would be required (read "forced") to give two years of service to the nation in some military or civilian capacity. Now, I can understand the rationale behind this recommendation. I'm not sure I'm willing to buy into it. He knows this will be controversial for he notes: "Libertarians find this proposal especially objectionable, insisting that governmental power over the individual must be kept to an absolute minimum.... But,...the libertarian approach ignores the substantial benefits not just for society but for the individual in the commitment to service."

I could immediately feel my own physical reaction when I read his UNS proposal. To libertarians, even moderate ones like I am, the idea of government-enforced service raises a red flag. The notion of government-enforced service, in our view, tends to fall into the same category as that of the personal income tax, which is why libertarians generally oppose such a tax. Both ideas, we generally argue, rest on the proposition that the government (or State, as some of us prefer to say) "own" us as human beings; it is a type of "slavery," the State claiming supremacy over our minds, bodies, sweat, blood, and tears to do with it what it will. If the State can demand two years of your life, it owns you. If you are paying fifty percent in personal income taxes, the State owns fifty percent of your mental and physical labor. Libertarians generally subscribe to a principle of personal sovereignty and argue for voluntary, consensual, and mutually-agreed-to contractual arrangements.

On the other hand, this does not mean that the idea of Universal National Service needs to be rejected outright. This one, like all the other proposals put forth by Sabato, should be debated in a public forum with input from all points on the political spectrum. But libertarians have a basic mistrust of government which is, by the way, historically justified. The political scientist Dr. R. J. Rummel has amply documented the history of what he calls "democide" (death by government) which in the twentieth century resulted in the mass killing of tens of millions of ordinary human beings by their own government. (And, need I say, the American government has not been immune from this phenomena in its own history.)

So, out of twenty-three proposals, I have no serious problem with twenty-two of them suggested by Sabato. In a constitutional convention, if I were a delegate (unlikely!), I might suggest some changes to his recommendations as far as the details are concerned. But, in general, I think he's on the right track. I give this book the highest recommendation, not because I agree with everything that the author says, but because I think he has important things to say that all citizens ought to hear and think about. If nothing else, "A More Perfect Constitution" will spark some much needed debate. And that alone makes Professor Sabato's book a worthwhile read.

Here's my take on it: The Founders put together the Constitution under intense pressure working from May 25th through September 17th, 1787. They took off every Sunday and five other days (total 20 days off) in a span of 112 days. The result was a remarkable document that none of them admitted to being satisfied with. It was chock full of compromises but it was the best they thought they could do - given their time constraints and the diverse needs of their varied constituents.

Since then it has been justly exalted and used as a benchmark for other nations' constitutions around the world, but compared to these other constitutions, it has undergone the least change. The founders themselves were quick to suggest that change be applied liberally and frequently to their document. This mentality was well represented by Washington's words, "We...do not contend that it is free from imperfections...there is a Constitutional door open for it [change]...I do not think we are more inspired, have more wisdom, or possess more virtue, than those who will come after us."

Author Sabato is a frequent political writer and long-time professor of government and political science. He presents a strong case for a new Constitutional Convention - the founders wisely make provisions for a mechanism for changes to the Constitution outside of Congress - and presents his suggested changes for discussion. Sabato knows his list would not be close to a final product and recommends three similar books that also include lists of recommended adjustments - with only a little overlap among their lists. In his lengthy notes, he recommends: Robinson's "Reforming American Government," Lazare's "The Frozen Republic," and Levinson's "Our Undemocratic Constitution" - so by no means is he alone in making the general argument advocating constitutional revision, although none are seriously tinkering with the basic design. Constitutional scholars have been thinking and writing about it ever since the founding of this country.

Sabato discusses each of his 23 proposals in depth, grouped into seven major categories, some of them objects of a couple of centuries of valid criticism. Then he outlines them briefly on pages 225 - 229 (a good place to start). Ten of the 23 issues addressed are:

* Congressional term limits
* Supreme Court and federal judge term limits
* Power of the president to unilaterally declare war
* Gerrymandering (partisan redistricting for House elections, named after Gerry when the tactic was first used in the 2nd or 3rd presidential election)
* Presidential primaries
* Electoral college reform
* All former Presidents and Vice-Presidents (if they want it) automatically get a participating seat in the Senate
* Balanced Budget Amendment, with appropriate safeguards and escape clauses
* Line-item veto for the President
* A naturalized American, having been a resident for 20 years, is eligible for the presidency

While no-one is likely to buy into all of Sabato's ideas, I would be surprised to find a voter who can't find improvements in at least some of them. Many of these thorns-in-our-side result from the founders simply not being able to predict the future, particularly political parties. Legislators have been unwilling to correct the deficiencies that apply to Congress because the correction would do away with the very mechanisms that get them easily re-elected - my simplistic assessment that bows to human nature. Other issues have not been resolved (by amendment) except when a crisis situation developed, partly due to a reverence about the timelessness of the document that none of the founders would have predicted nor advocated.

For each recommendation, Sabato gives inside information that might make you "not so sure" of your pet fix - for example, term limits. This is a concept that has clear backing from the public. Fortunately, we now have evidence as to whether it works as advertised. The California, Michigan, Louisiana, and Nevada state legislatures have all enacted term limits and the early results are in, with unexpectedly mixed results. The diversity composition of the legislatures (supposed to improve) didn't change much; intensive training programs for new legislators appeared and legislatures were about equally as productive (neutralizing the objections that so many new legislators at one time would slow down legislation); the power of the majority parties increased (whereas the idea was to create a better balance of power); the legislators forced to retire promptly filled other political seats at local, state, national, or lobbying levels ("musical political chair" phenomenon - absolute numbers of career politicians increased as opposed to the desired and predicted decrease). Term limits did not diminish the amount of lobbying - shrewd lobbyists just adapted their tactics. When the rules of the game changed, parties and special interests followed suit.

Eight states have taken it upon themselves to correct the problems of gerrymandering. In their wildest nightmares, the founders could not have predicted today's continuously redistricted House, where elaborate computer programs permit politicians to carve up the map precisely to protect every incumbent, while draining the competition out of House elections. Several different nonpartisan methods of redistricting have been instituted by these eight states, some putting the partisan computer programs to non-corrupt usage. Unlike the mixed results from term limits, more competitive elections have resulted with a more diverse House of Representatives. As a side benefit, resultant districts no longer look like a geographic hockey stick. Intense politics and entrenched interests have stalled similar efforts in many other states.

I'll bet you will be enlightened and fascinated. "A More Perfect Constitution" (imperfect word usage lifted directly from the Constitution) is a timely book, especially for the younger generation. Sabato thinks it might take a generation to accomplish a Constitutional Convention and that the internet and its blogsites are perfect forums to accelerate the process. Should one ever successfully be called and carried out, he suggests that an automatic 100 year Constitutional Convention be one of the new directives. Considering that Jefferson advocated a revolution every 19 years - so that each new generation didn't have to carry the baggage of the previous generation - a re-alignment, tune-up, and lube-job every 100 years sounds pretty conservative.

DB

Larry Sabato, America's best-known political scientist, says we need a Constitutional Convention and has a lot of ideas about how that convention could improve all branches of our government if three-fourths of the States approve.:
Executive: One six-or-maybe-eight-year term for the President.
Senate: 135 members (larger states get more). Terms coterminous with President. Former Presidents and Vice-Presidents to be national Senators.
House: Many more (1,000?) members. Three-year terms. (Congress can increase size at of the House today.)
Electoral College: Mend it, don't end it. Add seventy-four electors.
Judges: Fifteen-year terms. Retirement at 75-80.
Add: Term limits, Universal National Service, balanced budget amendment. (The budget discussion is excellent.)

Professor Sabato once again delivers an outstanding must-read for political junkies, academics, and anyone who is interested in the inner workings of the world's most sophisticated democracy.

Offering his signature blend of common-sense thinking and political and governmental expertise, Sabato presents his unique ideas in his typically accessible -- and highly readable -- fashion.

The book brings Sabato's substantial credibility to bear on a long-standing problem with American government and politics -- that the framers never intended that the US Constitution remain stagnant for so long.

Without undermining the brilliance of the original document, Sabato proposes amendments that would undo some of its more archaic provision as well as others that would update it for circumstances that the framers could never have foreseen.

Highly recommended. Another top-notch tome from the nation's most quoted political scientist.

Larry Sabato, one of the country's leading political analysts, once again provides an excellent, insightful commentary on the current U.S. political system. This book contains 23 innovative, thought-provoking suggestions on how to tweak (or in some cases radically alter) our governmental structure. Ideas such as limiting the presidency to a single, six-year term or eliminating lifetime tenure for federal judges can have major positive impacts on not only the functioning of American politics, but public perception and confidence in the system.

I particularly enjoyed the fact that these are realistic suggestions that inspire you to write to your congressman and say "Hey why didn't you think of that", rather than engaging you in some high-level academic exercise.

As always, Mr. Sabato's analysis is delivered in an intelligent yet easy-to-digest format, making this at once a great classroom text and bedside read. And, regardless of whether you agree with some, all, or none of Mr. Sabato's suggestions, you come away with a sense of optimism that we can, and will, make a more perfect union.

In his new book, Larry Sabato makes the case for a peaceful political revolution--a Constitutional Convention--to breathe new life into the American government. Sabato explains that the Framers never intended the Constitution to last forever, and given the lessons of the last 200 years, a many changes are long overdue.

Sabato's 23 proposals attack the problem at every level, from Presidential war powers to compulsory civil service, but what separates this book from ordinary punditry is the depth of Sabato's proposed solutions. Rather than grandstand, Sabato provides concrete suggestions that move the debate forward. Even if you disagree with his ideas, A More Perfect Constitution is sure to get you thinking.

This book is must reading for everyone who's frustrated by our present voting and political systems. Some of the ideas are a bit extreme, but they make you think. Our Constitution was designed to be improved. How can we make voting, and the Federal government/politics more responsive to US today? I hope I live to see the Constitutional Convention we so desperately need and the author strongly recommends. It will revive our political thinking and make our country more democratic. Good reading -- not boring!

Here, Professor Sabato applies the first rule of popular mechanics: you can't really understand something until you take it apart and try to put it back together again. For both politicos and casual observers of American politics, this book will be a more than entertaining read. Sabato's basic thesis is an attention graber - that the frustration at the inability of government to get anything done is not a function of "surface level" disagreements but instead the result of structural inadequacies with the system itself. Prof. Sabato "pops the hood" on the American political system to see if that system is really working for us anymore - and if not, what we could do to change it. The proposals he makes in this book vary from the completley sensible to the utterly surprising, but in every instance he makes cogent, carefully thought-our arguments designed to get you to think about how government is and is not working for you. If you're tired of politics as usual, pick this book up. It's worth the read.

Dr. Sabato has written another fascinating and thought-provoking book. His exploration of the Constitution and its inner workings are relevant and indeed necessary. This book will hopefully facilitate a necessary discourse regarding the Constitution and its application to contemporary American society. A great read for any individual who is committed to the perpetuation of American democratic values.

Larry Sabato has taken up the challenge put forth over 200 years ago by our Founding Fathers and the Framers of the Constitution, who urged future generations to amend the Constitution as America grew and changed.

You may not agree with all of Professor Sabatos proposals--some, like fixing the primaries and limiting the war powers act are ripped form today's news headlines--but I think you will agree that the ideas in this book are very thought provoking.

I fear that most Americans think it is too difficult, if not impossible, to change the system. But that is not true. Although it will not be easy or quick, changes can be made. Professor Sabato's book helps show the way to a better, fairer political system. Perhaps then more Americans will participate in the political process.

Larry Sabato's rare skill of making political science appealing and understandable to the masses really shines in A MORE PERFECT CONSTITUION.