Eric Lane and Michael Oreskes are absolutely correct when they argue in The Genius of America that our Constitution is of brilliant design and foresight. Like most readers, I enjoyed the discussion of the Founders' intent and the philosophical underpinnings of what at the time was a dynamically new system. But in the celebration of this bequest, it is vitally important to remember two things.
First, as Lane and Oreskes insist, we have a long way to go before the contemporary nation is truly worthy of the legacy of the Constitution. The facts about civic knowledge--or lack of it--truly are shocking. Only a bare majority of Americans can name even one basic purpose of the Constitution, many asserting that it was written to declare independence from Great Britain or to create the original thirteen states. Just four out of ten know that the Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments.
A survey of teenagers conducted by the National Constitution Center found that while 71 percent could name the first three letters of any Web address (www), just 35 percent knew the first three stirring words of the Constitution, We the People. A Zogby International poll revealed that the "Three Stooges" can be named by 78 percent of Americans, while just 42 percent knew the names of the three constitutional branches of government.
I am in full agreement with Lane and Oreskes that we must redouble our efforts in the mass media and in the educational system to inform young and old about the superstructure of the Constitution. What we do not know can hurt us.
Second, I see The Genius of America as phase one, with my own A More Perfect Constitution being phase two. In A More Perfect Constitution, I suggest 23 specific reforms in order to begin a discussion about how the Constitution can be improved and updated for the 21st Century. The Founders understood that their handiwork was a product of the conditions of their time, and while we have reformed bits and pieces of the Constitution over the years, much remains to be done. It is possible that the necessary changes can be accomplished through regular constitutional amendments, although I am not optimistic on this score. Congress has been a burial ground for virtually every good reform proposed in modern times. I prefer the alternate method provided by Article V, a Constitutional Convention, and I make the argument for a Convention to be held after careful preparation of many years in my own book.
I know that Lane and Oreskes are sympathetic to the idea and the need for reform, though they may not embrace a convention and some of the specific changes that I propose. Nonetheless, those of us in this vital field are unified in suggesting to the broader public that it is time to spend more of our energy thinking about and renewing the constitutional principles that have served us well over 220 years. It may also be true that it is past time to devote thought and energy to substantial reforms of some of the antiquated parts of the Constitution.
***
Larry J. Sabato is author of the book A More Perfect Constitution: 23 Proposals to Revitalize our Constitution and Make America a Fairer Country (Walker and Co., 2007) and director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics.