Essay: Considering constitutional revisions (Sabato)

As stated by the third longest-serving member of the United States Senate in American history, Edward M. Kennedy, “ The Constitution does not just protect those whose views we share; it also protects those with whose views we disagree.” In Larry Sabato’s A More Perfect Constitution, he conceptualizes this idea by calling for a constitutional convention, one in which amendments could be proposed in order to reform America and the government which guides us. He introduces a different approach to the document which we know so well; One that I believe is in need of great reform in order to sustain the integrity of our country and its people, as well as to support the natural path of progression on which America is begging to follow. Primarily, one of the main reasons I support a constitutional convention is due to the simple fact that the United States is not the same country it was 200 years ago when the Constitution was ratified. Based on daily violence, economic discontent, and injustices shown in the media, it is evident that we are in need of an assembly, for, “If we choose to act, change will be the result ”(18). By implementing a Balanced Budget Act, the allowance of immigrants to run for president, and required servitude, we can follow the road to a more perfect constitution and a successful constitutional convention.
My favorite of Sabato’s 23 suggestions is the idea of adding a Balanced Budget Act (BBA) to allow more opportunities for financial stability to future generations. As a new, young adult, I have been submerged head-first into a matured world full of paying for my own clothes, buying gas, and getting a job. With all of these exciting financial responsibilities thrust upon me, I want to be guaranteed that so long as I am an honest, hardworking member of the workforce, I will have an equal opportunity for a financially stable future. While this may seem like a lot to ask in a nation with individuals who are struggling, I agree that establishing this Balanced Budget Act will be a step in the right direction towards providing substantiality for my children and even grandchildren. Sabato alludes to Former President George Washington, in which he urges us to avoid, “ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear ”(Washington). Since his warning, our country has failed to do this; We see young citizens buried in loans and debt which have been left to them as a burden of their parents. Sabato hopes to ease these misfortunes with the abolishment of fiscal problems, reiterating that the new constitution, “… can start us on the road to solving it ”(54).
Next, I support Sabato’s proposal to allow men and women not born in the U.S. to run for President or Vice President after having been a citizen for 20 years. Being a child of an immigrant, I personally resonate with this idea for it allows for all Americans to have equal opportunities for success, even in a role as large as the President. I think the fact that a citizen must be U.S. born to run for president is ludicrous; Sabato suggests that while this “national-born” rule was sufficient in the early years when our nation was creating its unique identity, it is no longer relevant. He even points out that aside from the early native Americans, all Americans are technically either immigrants or descendants of immigrants, for they emigrated from Europe; So, to continue saying in the modern era that an immigrant can’t run for president is in fact highly hypocritical. Ironically, seven hundred of the thirty thousand immigrants that serve in the armed forces have won the Medal of Honor for their valor, yet, “An astonishing 14.4 million foreign born U.S. citizens are automatically excluded from consideration ” (18). After 20 years, an American immigrant could quite possibly be more patriotic and nationalistic than someone who was born here, for they have gained an appreciation for our freedoms and liberties that can only be learned, while a U.S. born citizen might take advantage of these rights. This would allow for a new view on leadership that our country so desperately craves, and could, in fact, be the most beneficial and extraordinary chance we could implement.
Finally, though questionable at first, I appreciate the proposal to create a Constitutional requirement that all able-bodied young Americans must devote at least 2 years in service to the country. At first glance, most Americans would be frightened at the idea of being required to send their child to war for two whole years. However, in the grand scheme of our country’s future, 2 years is nothing compared to a lifetime of safety. Sabato explains how, “ The four branches have had difficulty in meeting volunteer recruitment goals in recent years, as the Iraq War has grown more controversial” (169). Requiring two years of servitude from every American would alleviate this problem completely, and our military would jump up in world rank. It would also provide free forms of service education and nation-wide training to America’s young adults, thus killing two birds with one stone by ensuring that every able-bodied person receives some sort of higher education. One model example of this can be drawn from Israel: Small but Mighty. Its exalted military, the Israeli Defense Force (IDF), is considered the most effective armed force in the world. Israel requires two years of servitude as well, and Sabato suggests its conditions America should mimic include: true universality, the flexibility of timing, a wide choice of service opportunities, appropriate incentives, and special provisions for new immigrants. With these ingredients for success in mind, America can borrow Israel’s recipe to a prosperous military. Required servitude could increase not only education and national safety but our country’s unity.
In conclusion, holding a constitutional convention would be a major, but imperative process. “Whether the convention’s handiwork [is] minimal or maximal, the dangers to the Republic would be quite limited” (218). Sabato explains that, more good would emerge than bad  because, “…the public’s voices would be heard during the convention debate” (218). While there would be, “unavoidable legal bumps” (219), the results of a more productive and united nation would well worth the struggle. The complexities involved in a constitutional revision are extensive, but the success that would come with even one minimal revision would stand to prove that America is capable of the mass progress it needs.