Thank you Dr. Levinson for a genuinely thoughtful argument concerning our constitution and its deep need for substantial revision. Point by point, he moves from the undeserved reverence Americans have for this document to its faults. He then suggested much needed reforms.

Levinson insists that the Electoral College should be abandoned so that the people, not the states elect our president. His points are well considered, although he fails to explain that Electoral College was adopted because, in 1787, each of the states was considered a sovereign nation loosely bound to the union recently defined as the United States of America.

I was especially convinced by the comparison he makes between our system and the Parliamentary system when it comes to ineffective presidents. The latter permits a president who has lost the support of most of his constituents to be removed from office. Our system does not. Like our fellow democracies, we should be able to remove a president at will rather than having to wait out a pre-determined administrative term.

Levinson also addresses other equally relevant issues related to our constitution and does so in a balanced manner. He helps us to realize that our nation was created as a republic, not a democracy, and the constitution actually serves to block democracy in numerous ways.

I recommend Our Undemocratic Constitution to all politically inclined Americans. This is not only food for thought, but food for action.

Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution Goes Wrong (And How We the People Can Correct It)Although I believe the author is on the right track about how our constitution needs to be changed to make it more democratic, I found his arguments to be somewhat fuzzy. This is a shame since it is such an important topic.

First of all Mr. Steele, Scooter Libby was NOT pardoned, he had his sentenced commuted...there is a difference.
Secondly, everything espoused in Levinson's book would curiously help liberal (read: Democrat) candidates, legislators, and/or movements, NGOs and "activists."

It is true the problem with the senate is age old; the senate has been a thorn in the side of the executive since 1789. Direct election of senators was a terrible idea; we can thank the populists for that. When senators were chosen by state legislatures, the senators represented the STATE'S interest against encroachment by the federal government. Today the opposite is true.
Your love for ex-Klansman Sen. Bob Byrd is telling. Talk about an obstructionist senator from a small inconsequential state. While it is true that both parties have devolved into agencies that mainly fleece the populace.
Nurturing entrepreneurs will never occur in a country that is heavily legislated and union driven. It's a sad fact. Our middle class manufacturing base is not compatible with globalization, and will be completely gone in the next generation.
A constitutional convention is a pipe dream no matter how many states offer their citizens a review.

Your knee jerk hatred of Dick Cheney is telling. His crimes are no worse than Al Gore's, who along with his boss, sold the US out to China in the 90's. Where were all the unions and progressives who supported this duo then? Hmm?

Our constitution was made difficult to amend for a GOOD reason. Imagine all the wrenching changes it would have gone through the past 200 years had it been easier to amend.

Senator Byrd again. Well, your man Byrd is one of the most profligate spenders of federal tax monies in the history of that august body. He brings billions into tiny West Virginia. How is he not part of the problem?? Just because he stands up and denounces President Bush? Yeah, I though so.

It's true people do not rule this country. They are sheep. As long as they can go to the mall and the movies they are happy. It's quite obvious the powers that be have figured this out. It is funny how you think removing President Bush should be made a priority, but removing Bill Clinton because he lied to a grand jury is not so important. Very telling indeed.

The reason campaigns do not pick a transitional cabinet is because they would immediately come under scrutiny and then be attacked by opposing forces and the media. All their backgrounds would become fodder and fair game for disgracing the candidates.

David Walker is a fine man. People don't want to heed his siren because it would affect their snouts in the trough...I'm talking about regular Americans and the politicians who are afraid of them.

Ending wasteful spending would mean the end to your favorite, Sen. Byrd to start with; the worst spender of the bunch. Balancing the budget would call for extreme cuts in entitlements. You think the "activist" groups would stand for that??

Not having the VP assume the presidency upon the latter's death is ridiculous. What are we supposed to have, some star chamber choose the next president and abrogate the will of the people?? Seems like I heard so much talk like that during Clinton's impeachment. Yet now you and Levinson propose the same thing.

Immigrants more loyal to Israel??? You meant Mexico. The borders have broken and will ultimately lead to the demise of the US. Those of us who have gotten dual citizenships will lead the mass migration OUT of the US, eroding the tax and brain base.

I don't think we can take any recommendation from Denmark. They're about to be overrun by a minority of Muslims, which pose a greater threat to democracy than our hapless House of Representatives.

It's true, congress needs a wholesale change, as well as the executive. However, you ain't gonna get it this November no matter whose majorities grow, or what idiot senator is elected.

What will it take to get us mad? Well, it will begin with the young people in this country having a living standard nowhere near their parents. Once Americans can't go to the mall, it will be all over with.

Oh, and when China, Japan, and the rest stop buying our T-bills, we won't have to worry about cutting entitlements and the defense budget. That will kinda happen on it's own at that point.

Bravo.

Levinson is a law professor in Austin who has written a short book of how "undemocratic" our Constitution is. This is supposed to be a real revelation as he covers many examples of how he defines "democracy" in the modern era.
Yes the small states get the same two Senators that the big states get, which I guess is why the Founding Fathers called the document "The Great Compromise" when it was adopted. Levinson makes the assumption that somehow a document written as a compromise over 200 years ago would somehow not be subject to even more compromises in a new constitutional convention, especially given the massive differences in how Americans look at the political leadership of both major parties today.
While I find some of Levinson's arguments interesting, underlying this book is the assumption that everyone in the USA would join in a new "more democratic" union if the document establishing the country were to be so radically modified.
I suspect a more likely scenario would be the secessionists Levinson dismisses would actually control the day and the states with the smaller populations would join together to form a new country with political leaders more to their liking and the more populous states would then form the parenthesis "blue" country divided by the "red middle" of the former USA.
And since most of the military comes from the "red states" and any attempt to prevent the breakup of the country would fall to a military that has few members from the University of Austin or the Upper West Side of NY city, not to mention Hollywood and other liberal bastions, who is going to prevent this from happening? I doubt Professor Levinson even owns a gun.
Levinson has written half a book, making assumptions that hold as much water as Jimmy Carter's decision to start the war in Afghanistan in 1979 in order to draw the Soviets into their "Vietnam" which was an even more half-baked idea. We will live with the consequences of that decision for generations to come, and Levinson's ideas in this book are just as silly, and just as dangerous.

This is one of those critical books where even a top reviewer is well advised to carfefully consider all extant reviews by others, and I have done so. They all have something important, less the fellow that cannot handle brilliance in others. Having considered all the other reviews, I continue in my own belief that this book is a solid FIVE for good sense, elegance in presentation, and timeliness.

Although I have recently lauded State of the Unions: How Labor Can Strengthen the Middle Class, Improve Our Economy, and Regain Political Influence as perhaps the most important book in 2008, I confess that while I still believe that in terms of restoring democracy in November, this author has provided all of us with a compelling intelligent case for demanding a constitution convention in 2008, both through a nation-wide petition to all serving Members, and through direct controntation with our three candidates (two kids and an old guy--Bloomberg is looking better and better).

My flyleaf notes begin with INSPIRING! Coinfirms we need a new constitutional convention, ably distinguishing between then and now.

I would endorse the above conclusion, arguments unseen (yet) by pointinig out that there are 27 active secessionist movements in the USA today, with the third annual meeting of these groups coming up in October 2008. They are led by Kirkpatrick Sale, author of Human Scale and I judge most of their grievances and demands to be LEGITIMATE. When combined with the reality that Congress has gerrymandered a third of the population into irrelevance, and made it impossible for another third, the Working Poor, to vote without trade-offs with work (I refer to those who walk, bike, or bus to work), I am absolutely won over by this book's premise.

The author takes issue with seven tiny state populations having the same two Senators, and notes in passing that Senators were supposed to be elected by their legislatures rather than the people. That was changed many many years after the original was signed.

He discusses the problems with the Electoral College, with Executive power, with the Supreme Court being appointed for life, and with 13 states being able to block the rest if and when a constitutional amendment is proposed.

He ends the introductory section by surmising that the Constitution is both insufficiently democratic and dysfunctional. As one who thinks all Members less Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) should be impeached or at least not re-elected (see Breach of Trust: How Washington Turns Outsiders Into Insiders and The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track (Institutions of American Democracy), and both party structures DESTROYED (see Running On Empty: How The Democratic and Republican Parties Are Bankrupting Our Future and What Americans Can Do About It, a Constitutional Convention in 2009 makes definite sense to me. I would note that Henry Kissinger among many others has noted the dysfunctionality of government, and many others I have reviewed here point to the blurring of the lines among governments, organizations, cororations, and civil society, and the need to find new ways of forming and informing and leveraging Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics, and Ethics as Anthropological Problems while also nurturing social entrepreneurs (see How to Change the World: Social Entrepreneurs and the Power of New Ideas, Updated Edition and also The Power of Unreasonable People: How Social Entrepreneurs Create Markets That Change the World.

The author notes that 14 states offer their citizens a vote on whether a new constitutional review is needed, and I reiterate, if we have 27 secessionist movements, we have 27 major groups whose existence by definition DEMANDS a Constititional Convention.

The author notes that the Preamble is THE most important part of the Constitution, and it is at this point that I have a note: Joins Lessig and Sunstein as one of my top three lawyers (see also my list on judging Dick Cheney's impeachability).

The author goes on to note that the US Constitition is THE most difficult Constitution on the planet to amend, and further observes that Congress excells at passing pork while failing always to pass substantive legislation. I agree--we cannot even get Senators Obama, Clinton, and McCain to *acknowledge* our public request that they introduce the eight-point Electoral Reform Act prior to 3 July 2008 (to read the outline of the Act, based on Ralph Nader's recommendations and refined by Jim Turner and Robert Steele, visit Earth Intelligence Network and look for it in the top menu). As the books I linked to above document, there are two kinds of corruption in Washington: financial bribery, and party line abdication. Congress is supposed to balance the power of a "reackless and arrogant" Presidency, to quote the estimable Senator Byrd, the only one with a spine in that body.

The author proposes a tricameral situation where the President is just one of three bodies that can veto anything, and where two of the three (the others being the Senate and House, as well as the President) can over-ride the third.

He mentions DC not being represented (one reason all DC license plates have "Taxation Without Representation" on them), discusses the need for extended terms (I agree--with longevity, it makes sense to increase the House to four years, the President to six years, and the Senate to eight years).

Other highlights I note:

Death and disability in the House are not properly addressed.

The people do NOT rule America, and two thirds of them lack confidence in Congress (the percentage is probably higher today).

He spends some excellent time discussing how hard it is to replace an incompetent President (to which I would add, and how easy for an irresponsible Congress to impeach a President and spend $50 million on a minor sexual act between consenting adults (yes, there is marriage, but there is also the flagrant extra-curricular activity of the wife, so let's call it even).

He notes how dreadful our Presidential selection process is, and I for one can only agree most forcefully. I have stopped watching the barnyard brawl between Clinton and Obama, both children and neither offering serious programs in the context of a balanced budget, and I have also written off John McCain, who is an honorable pig-headed man with no idea of how to create a grand strategy that shapes our inter-agency capabilities and policies while resurrecting multinational alliances. In this regard, I will mention four ideas a number of us have had since 2000:

1. Presidential candidates should be required to name a transition Cabinet in advance of the election, and

2. have at least three (Attorney General, Defense, and State) participate in Cabinet level debates--America is too complicated to elect one person who then picks their cronies from one party (see Transpartisan at Wikipedia or at Reuniting America).

3. The Transpartisan Cabinet should be announced on New Year's Day of the Election Year, and be required to present a balanced budget for online deliberative dialog as well as face to face town hall meetings, by 4 July of Election Year. David Walker, former Comptroller General, resinged in year nine of a 15 year appointment because he declared the US insolvent, and not a single Member, INCLUDING Senators Obama, Clinton, and McCain, paid heed. Today David Walker runs the Peterson Foundation, and his job is to inform all of us--we care, we are ahead of the jerks in Congress--so that we can demand a restoration of a balanced budget and an end to the corruption and wasteful spending of what Davy Crockett learned was "not his to give."

4. At the same time that we end the Cabinet being all from one party, we must end the winner take all leadership of Congress, and move to proportioinal representation, where all Libertarians in any one state count, and tightly drawn districts are allocated accordingly (See the eight-point Electoral Reform Act).

The author winds down by noting there is no point to the delay between election and inauguration, that pardon power is too loose (I for one would forbid Presidents from pardoning their own staff who get caught doing illegal things on behalf of the President--such as Scooter Libby).

The author surprises me, but I have to agree, with the suggestion that the Vice President NOT be automatically elevated to the Presidency if the President dies. Given the nakedly amoral Vice President we have now, a man that is a combination of war criminal, closet dictator, thief, and perverted in his own secret ways (see, among many other books, Vice: Dick Cheney and the Hijacking of the American Presidency) this is not only a sensible point of view, but an urgent one.

The author is against qualification for office such as age, citizenship, and time in state, and Arnold the Terminator as well as all of his Austrian friends will clearly love the author's view that even the Presidency should be open to non-native Americans. I am inclined to agree, with the caveat that we have cheapened our citizenship, both with corporate personality and with gratuitous welcoming of millions who got here illegally, who have not learned to speak English, and who more often than not are more loyal to Israel or to a religion than they are to America. This whole thing needs work.

The author ends with "what is to be done" and suggests a nation-wide petition to every Member demanding a Constitutional Convention be called. He also notes with favor the value of real referendums, and of deliberative polling. In Denmark, important questions are decided by a citizen's jury that can call witnesses, grill them, supeona them, and so on. The only qualification is that the citizen know nothing of the issue and have a completely clear and open mind. For other good ideas, see Tom Atlee's superb book, The Tao of Democracy: Using Co-Intelligence to Create a World That Works for All.

I put the book down with admiration for the author, and a real concern that Americans will remain apathetic sheep. We should all be signing recall petitions now, and not waiting to vote out the incumbents. We should have the incumbents, each and every one less Senator Byrd, scared to within an inch of their life. Otherwise, we will suffer the same fate and the 25+ kids at Virginia Polytechnic who instead of "rushing and crushing" the mentally ill person killing them one at a time, stood still while he reloaded and methodically shot each of them. Congress is killing each and every one of us by allowing Cheney and Bush to run amok unchecked. The country is bankrupt. The infrastucture, schools, health system, labor unions--all in the toilet. What does it take to make us MAD? I do not know. If and when we do get mad, this author and this book must be among the serious works that guide our citizen leaders as we restore the Republic.

Bravo.

This is one of those critical books where even a top reviewer is well advised to carfefully consider all extant reviews by others, and I have done so. They all have something important, less the fellow that cannot handle brilliance in others. Having considered all the other reviews, I continue in my own belief that this book is a solid FIVE for good sense, elegance in presentation, and timeliness.

Although I have recently lauded State of the Unions: How Labor Can Strengthen the Middle Class, Improve Our Economy, and Regain Political Influence as perhaps the most important book in 2008, I confess that while I still believe that in terms of restoring democracy in November, this author has provided all of us with a compelling intelligent case for demanding a constitution convention in 2008, both through a nation-wide petition to all serving Members, and through direct controntation with our three candidates (two kids and an old guy--Bloomberg is looking better and better).

My flyleaf notes begin with INSPIRING! Coinfirms we need a new constitutional convention, ably distinguishing between then and now.

I would endorse the above conclusion, arguments unseen (yet) by pointinig out that there are 27 active secessionist movements in the USA today, with the third annual meeting of these groups coming up in October 2008. They are led by Kirkpatrick Sale, author of Human Scale and I judge most of their grievances and demands to be LEGITIMATE. When combined with the reality that Congress has gerrymandered a third of the population into irrelevance, and made it impossible for another third, the Working Poor, to vote without trade-offs with work (I refer to those who walk, bike, or bus to work), I am absolutely won over by this book's premise.

The author takes issue with seven tiny state populations having the same two Senators, and notes in passing that Senators were supposed to be elected by their legislatures rather than the people. That was changed many many years after the original was signed.

He discusses the problems with the Electoral College, with Executive power, with the Supreme Court being appointed for life, and with 13 states being able to block the rest if and when a constitutional amendment is proposed.

He ends the introductory section by surmising that the Constitution is both insufficiently democratic and dysfunctional. As one who thinks all Members less Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) should be impeached or at least not re-elected (see Breach of Trust: How Washington Turns Outsiders Into Insiders and The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track (Institutions of American Democracy), and both party structures DESTROYED (see Running On Empty: How The Democratic and Republican Parties Are Bankrupting Our Future and What Americans Can Do About It, a Constitutional Convention in 2009 makes definite sense to me. I would note that Henry Kissinger among many others has noted the dysfunctionality of government, and many others I have reviewed here point to the blurring of the lines among governments, organizations, cororations, and civil society, and the need to find new ways of forming and informing and leveraging Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics, and Ethics as Anthropological Problems while also nurturing social entrepreneurs (see How to Change the World: Social Entrepreneurs and the Power of New Ideas, Updated Edition and also The Power of Unreasonable People: How Social Entrepreneurs Create Markets That Change the World.

The author notes that 14 states offer their citizens a vote on whether a new constitutional review is needed, and I reiterate, if we have 27 secessionist movements, we have 27 major groups whose existence by definition DEMANDS a Constititional Convention.

The author notes that the Preamble is THE most important part of the Constitution, and it is at this point that I have a note: Joins Lessig and Sunstein as one of my top three lawyers (see also my list on judging Dick Cheney's impeachability).

The author goes on to note that the US Constitition is THE most difficult Constitution on the planet to amend, and further observes that Congress excells at passing pork while failing always to pass substantive legislation. I agree--we cannot even get Senators Obama, Clinton, and McCain to *acknowledge* our public request that they introduce the eight-point Electoral Reform Act prior to 3 July 2008 (to read the outline of the Act, based on Ralph Nader's recommendations and refined by Jim Turner and Robert Steele, visit Earth Intelligence Network and look for it in the top menu). As the books I linked to above document, there are two kinds of corruption in Washington: financial bribery, and party line abdication. Congress is supposed to balance the power of a "reackless and arrogant" Presidency, to quote the estimable Senator Byrd, the only one with a spine in that body.

The author proposes a tricameral situation where the President is just one of three bodies that can veto anything, and where two of the three (the others being the Senate and House, as well as the President) can over-ride the third.

He mentions DC not being represented (one reason all DC license plates have "Taxation Without Representation" on them), discusses the need for extended terms (I agree--with longevity, it makes sense to increase the House to four years, the President to six years, and the Senate to eight years).

Other highlights I note:

Death and disability in the House are not properly addressed.

The people do NOT rule America, and two thirds of them lack confidence in Congress (the percentage is probably higher today).

He spends some excellent time discussing how hard it is to replace an incompetent President (to which I would add, and how easy for an irresponsible Congress to impeach a President and spend $50 million on a minor sexual act between consenting adults (yes, there is marriage, but there is also the flagrant extra-curricular activity of the wife, so let's call it even).

He notes how dreadful our Presidential selection process is, and I for one can only agree most forcefully. I have stopped watching the barnyard brawl between Clinton and Obama, both children and neither offering serious programs in the context of a balanced budget, and I have also written off John McCain, who is an honorable pig-headed man with no idea of how to create a grand strategy that shapes our inter-agency capabilities and policies while resurrecting multinational alliances. In this regard, I will mention four ideas a number of us have had since 2000:

1. Presidential candidates should be required to name a transition Cabinet in advance of the election, and

2. have at least three (Attorney General, Defense, and State) participate in Cabinet level debates--America is too complicated to elect one person who then picks their cronies from one party (see Transpartisan at Wikipedia or at Reuniting America).

3. The Transpartisan Cabinet should be announced on New Year's Day of the Election Year, and be required to present a balanced budget for online deliberative dialog as well as face to face town hall meetings, by 4 July of Election Year. David Walker, former Comptroller General, resinged in year nine of a 15 year appointment because he declared the US insolvent, and not a single Member, INCLUDING Senators Obama, Clinton, and McCain, paid heed. Today David Walker runs the Peterson Foundation, and his job is to inform all of us--we care, we are ahead of the jerks in Congress--so that we can demand a restoration of a balanced budget and an end to the corruption and wasteful spending of what Davy Crockett learned was "not his to give."

4. At the same time that we end the Cabinet being all from one party, we must end the winner take all leadership of Congress, and move to proportioinal representation, where all Libertarians in any one state count, and tightly drawn districts are allocated accordingly (See the eight-point Electoral Reform Act).

The author winds down by noting there is no point to the delay between election and inauguration, that pardon power is too loose (I for one would forbid Presidents from pardoning their own staff who get caught doing illegal things on behalf of the President--such as Scooter Libby).

The author surprises me, but I have to agree, with the suggestion that the Vice President NOT be automatically elevated to the Presidency if the President dies. Given the nakedly amoral Vice President we have now, a man that is a combination of war criminal, closet dictator, thief, and perverted in his own secret ways (see, among many other books, Vice: Dick Cheney and the Hijacking of the American Presidency) this is not only a sensible point of view, but an urgent one. It would also keep village idiots from being murdered in their sleep as we process them for early retirement.

The author is against qualification for office such as age, citizenship, and time in state, and Arnold the Terminator as well as all of his Austrian friends will clearly love the author's view that even the Presidency should be open to non-native Americans. I am inclined to agree, with the caveat that we have cheapened our citizenship, both with corporate personality and with gratuitous welcoming of millions who got here illegally, who have not learned to speak English, and who more often than not are more loyal to Israel or to a religion than they are to America. This whole thing needs work.

The author ends with "what is to be done" and suggests a nation-wide petition to every Member demanding a Constitutional Convention be called. He also notes with favor the value of real referendums, and of deliberative polling. In Denmark, important questions are decided by a citizen's jury that can call witnesses, grill them, supeona them, and so on. The only qualification is that the citizen know nothing of the issue and have a completely clear and open mind. For other good ideas, see Tom Atlee's superb book, The Tao of Democracy: Using Co-Intelligence to Create a World That Works for All.

I put the book down with admiration for the author, and a real concern that Americans will remain apathetic sheep. We should all be signing recall petitions now, and not waiting to vote out the incumbents. We should have the incumbents, each and every one less Senator Byrd, scared to within an inch of their life. Otherwise, we will suffer the same fate and the 25+ kids at Virginia Polytechnic who instead of "rushing and crushing" the mentally ill person killing them one at a time, stood still while he reloaded and methodically shot each of them. Congress is killing each and every one of us by allowing Cheney and Bush to run amok unchecked. The country is bankrupt. The infrastucture, schools, health system, labor unions--all in the toilet. What does it take to make us MAD? I do not know. If and when we do get mad, this author and this book must be among the serious works that guide our citizen leaders as we restore the Republic.

Bravo.

this is a book everyone should read. maybe then we could have a real democracy for the people and by the people.

University of Texas law school professor Sanford Levinson has penned an intriguing if uneven argument for constitional revision. Although he is a distinguished law professor, this book is focused more on the workings of government than legal principles and is aimed at the layman rather than the legal audience. As a result, the book in engaging for anyone interested in how government should function.

Professor Levinson starts with the premise that American be asked whether to call a convention to revise the constitition. He then proceeds to offer arguments for why an informed citizen would vote for such a referendum. He persuasively argues that since many of the founding fathers (James Madison notwithstanding) did not treat the constitution as fixed and immutable, neither should we the people.

Some of Professor Levinson's arguments are stronger and more cogent than others. His chapter on the legislative branch offer telling examples of why representation by state in the senate gives disproportionate power to thinly populated states without any corresponding interest being served. Professor Levinson also offers interesting arguments for appointing Supreme Court justices to fixed eighteen year terms. Specifically, he points out that the development of the Supreme Court as a political body and the increasing longevity of justices creates perverse incentives for administrations to appoint young justices who will wield power long after the administration which appointed them is gone and perhaps well after they are capable of serving.

On the other hand, his chapter on the presidency, which is subtitled, "Too Powerful Presidents Chosen by an Indefensible Process, Who Cannot Be Displaced Even When They are Manifestly Incompetent," promises more than it can deliver. While problems with the electoral college have been widely aired (so that this book delivers nothing new), his other critiques are more likely to provoke a yawn than outrage. While the president may be tempted to abuse his powers or the voters may choose an unqualifed president, the constitition already contains an adequate remedy for these problems in the form of periodic elections. Giving Congress the power to remove the president through a vote of no-confidence is more likely to provoke endless battles between the executive and legislative branch than good government.

Another flaw in the book is that the author assumes that more democracy is inherently a good thing but, due to the limited scope of the book, doesn't adequately discuss the point. As a result, Professor Levinson is critical of some of the checks and balances which retard or prevent governmental action. The requirement that a bill pass the House and Senate and then be signed by the President is considered undemocratic compared to what could be accomplished by a unicameral legislature unfettered by a presidential veto. However, this position equates more legislation with more democracy. Since the government may have incentives to increase its powers at the expense of the people who elected it, a system requiring legislation to gain greater consensus could be more democratic. However, this slender book does not delve deeply into these underlying concepts.

Having noted these drawbacks, this review intends to praise through faint criticism. Professor Levinson has served up a useful conversation starter which is accessible to a wide segment of Americans. While readers may disagree with some of his suggestions, the conversation itself is worth having.