Constitutional questions

Re “We need a new Constitution,” Opinion, Oct. 10

Larry J. Sabato is probably right in his assessment that it is time for some changes to the Constitution. One of the document’s glories is that it can be changed, and the process is provided in the document itself. However, I question some of his suggestions. His proposal to change the number of senators would give states with large populations and metropolitan centers the ability to impose programs that benefit themselves to the detriment of states with smaller populations. Similarly, the electoral college provides an incentive for candidates to create broadly appealing platforms. His suggestion that any military conflict must have continuing resolutions every six months appears to be based on watching television programs in which all problems can be solved in less than 60 minutes. Groups such as Al Qaeda recognize that they can achieve their goals by outlasting the attention span of the U.S. electorate. We need leaders who will do what is best for the country even when it is unpopular.

Greg Welch

Raleigh, N.C.

--

Of much greater urgency would be amending the Constitution to prohibit citizenship to the offspring of illegal immigrants and to establish English as the official national language. This would go a long way toward prodding assimilation of legal immigrants and preserving our culture.

Mike Bennett

Rowland Heights

--

We don’t need a new Constitution. We need to fix the one we’ve got. The president needs to be elected by popular vote. Congressional term limits need to be set. Supreme Court justices should have to come up for reappointment every five years. State sovereignty needs to be upheld. California’s Compassionate Use Act should nullify the war on drugs as it applies to cannabis. The executive and legislative branches dictating what the judiciary, at all levels, can and cannot do must be terminated. Mandatory minimum sentencing laws are an attack on the separation of powers.

David Dunn

Louisville, Ky.

--

Sabato is off base if he thinks the unfairness in the country is because of the Constitution. The Senate was not intended to represent persons but states. The “war powers balance” could be restored by adhering to the present Constitution. Of all the presidential elections, only two or three posed any problems concerning electors. What is needed is to enforce the Constitution as it’s written. The government has a hard time with that one because the present Constitution is quite protective of citizens’ rights. The source of confusion is not the Constitution but the legal system’s treatment of it.

Jeanne Mount

Beverly Hills