In his widely acclaimed volume Our Undemocratic Constitution, Sanford
Levinson boldly argued that our Constitution should not be treated with
"sanctimonious reverence," but as a badly flawed document deserving
revision. Now Levinson takes us deeper, asking what were the original
assumptions underlying our institutions, and whether we accept those
assumptions 225 years later.
In Framed, Levinson challenges our belief that the most important
features of our constitutions concern what rights they protect. Instead,
he focuses on the fundamental procedures of governance such as
congressional bicameralism; the selection of the President by the
electoral college, or the dimensions of the President's veto power--not
to mention the near impossibility of amending the United States
Constitution. These seemingly "settled" and "hardwired" structures
contribute to the now almost universally recognized "dysfunctionality"
of American politics.
Levinson argues that we should stop treating the United States
Constitution as uniquely exemplifying the American constitutional
tradition. We should be aware of the 50 state constitutions, often
interestingly different--and perhaps better--than the national model.
Many states have updated their constitutions by frequent amendment or by
complete replacement via state constitutional conventions. California's
ungovernable condition has prompted serious calls for a constitutional
convention. This constant churn indicates that basic law often reaches
the point where it fails and becomes obsolete. Given the experience of
so many states, he writes, surely it is reasonable to believe that the
U.S. Constitution merits its own updating.
Whether we are concerned about making America more genuinely democratic
or only about creating a system of government that can more effectively
respond to contemporary challenges, we must confront the ways our
constitutions, especially the United States Constitution, must be
changed in fundamental ways.
