Argauer 1

Constitutional Reform

The Framers, in crafting the constitution had a few recent events and experiences to help

guide them in crafting a document which would keep a nation together for over 200 years and

still continues to thrive. Not only is the United States thriving, but it is the biggest and most

powerful nation in the world bar none. This is all due to the constitution which was drafted many

years ago. It has been and continues to be the glue which keeps the fabric that is the political

differences within politics together. However, the history of the U.S. has not been all hunky-dory

but has faced many struggles, struggles which could have torn the country in two. Within the

struggles, many have called out the constitution and the problems which it contains. Some

disagree with the way the government is set up, another quarrel with certain processes within the

document. Regardless of the particular disagreement, there is always room for discussion of

different ideas, and what better to have a disagreement than with the founding document of the

United States of America.

One person who has a particular disdain for the constitution is a professor from the

University of Texas Law School, Sanford Levinson. His disagreement with the constitution is

emulated in the book, the enduring debate:

As originally written, the Constitution came nowhere near the aspirations of the Preamble,

explicitly allowing slavery, and even after amendments retain several anti-democratic

elements, including the electoral college; the vastly unequal representation in the Senate

which Wyoming (Population 544,000) has the same voting power as California

(population 37 million, over sixty times as large); and lifetime tenure for judges.
 Argauer 2

While his point concerning the failure of the constitution to outlaw slavery is valid, he discredits

his own argument later in the sentence by saying that there were amendments which banned

slavery. Furthermore, there was no possible way at that time that the Constitution was ratified if it

had outlawed slavery explicitly. Instead, it was necessary to allow time and eventually a civil war

to show that all people are created equally.

He then addresses several anti-democratic elements within the Constitution; the first being

the electoral college. However, in the Federalist #68, Hamilton defends the need for an electoral

college. He is trying to prevent the mob from electing the president while still allowing people to

vote for their president. He believes the system of an electoral college gives “as little opportunity

as possible to tumult and disorder.”

Furthermore, the unequal representation in the Senate and lifetime appointment for judges

are two other problems Levinson has with the constitution. However, the Senate representation is

not supposed to be fair. It is supposed to give all states as it is put in Federalist #62,

"constitutional recognition of the portion of sovereignty remaining in the individual states.” This

is because states are still sovereign regardless of their population. The sovereignty was a much

bigger deal however, before the New Deal when FDR consolidated much of the power of the state

to the executive branch. The lifetime appointment of judges is in place to remove their

partisanship. If they were elected every so often, they would rule in favor of whoever is going to

elect them again. By making their appointments lifetime, it removes this factor.

Levinson is not the only one with a problem with the constitution. In Brutus 1 “…but a

little attention to the powers vested in the general government, will convince every candid man,

that if it is capable of being executed, all that is reserved for the individual states must very soon

be annihilated, except so far as they are barely necessary to the organization of the general
 Argauer 3

government.” This is a legitimate problem with the government today. In Federalist 51 it is

argued that “ambition must be made to counteract ambition.” This was the idea of the checks and

balances as well as the system of federalism which the Framers set up. However, currently, the

state’s powers have been usurped by the federal government, namely the executive branch.

However, for all of the debate about why we should scrap the constitution or amend it heavily, it

has kept the rule in the United States and done an incredible job. While there are many reasons to

change certain aspects of the Constitution, for the most part, it is here to stay.