Centerfield

"One might be tempted to speculate that this enterprise could give Europe a greater appreciation for the American political experience, and maybe even lessen old world haughtiness which some Europeans bring to their view of our culture."

One might be tempted to break out in fits of hysterical, disbelieving laughter until one's coworkers stopped grinning and started looking concerned.

I think they already have constitutions there...

That said, I read half of this new EU one under consideration. Although I'm fairly pro-EU, I think it really sucks. Contrary to what the article said, it doesn't "streamline" anything. The word "streamline" being used to describe it suggests that the article author didn't read it himself (don't blame him, given its length).

The US constitution authors based ours around what was needed for good governance. The EU constitution authors based theirs around thinking how they could get it past EU politics, not improving EU governance.

It reminds me of the Texas Constitution, to which amendments reliably show up on every ballot. The only way the Texas Constitution hasn't failed is that the government is still democratic.

At that, the EU Constitution has some nasty bugs in it. The Bill-of-Rights equivalent can be amended by a special committee, without reference to voters or any high hurdles like 3/4 of the states. The legislature doesn't control its own agenda. Certain policy areas are declared off-limits to member governments, which is dumb, because that means local governments can't legally even coordinate with the EU on these issues.

No surprise that it's deeply unpopular among EU voters....

I honestly don't know very much about the EU, it's Constitution or even all of the nations involved.

But having read the process they're going through...it's inspiring. I actually got tears in my eyes reading the Globe story on it. It's such an important exercise...what they're doing. It's like peeking in to a slice of what our founders went through.

It gave me a pang, really. Our country would do well to spend more time revisiting it's roots. History needs to be taught more indepth...especially American Colonial History, the development of our government, the Civil War, etc. I wish people knew more...and could find ways to relate to the struggles those folks went through when building our nation.

Saw that article. It left me ROTFL.

Yes, we need to teach a LOT more American history to our kids, and in a lot more detail. And if anyone thinks the elections are looking ugly this year, go back and look at the elections from the 1800's....

Democracy is good, but democracy is also very messy. But 'tis better to fight with words and votes over who gets to be temporary consitutionally-restrained top dog, than to fight with guns and knives (and tanks!) over who's going to be Supreme Dictator. Europe has certainly had their share of the latter, and a heckuva lot more recently than we have.

I don't think "ROTFL" is necessarily an appropriate response to that piece...but whatever.

I think it's awesome that they're going through the exercise. And given the pretty lousy direction our country has been headed lately...it would behoove us to revisit how our founders did things and why a lot more closely.

Congrats to the EU for doing it, IMO.

Well, we are still doing it, 200 years later. The battle over federal vs. states rights has been a constant conversation in the courts and the legislative aisles. Oregon just won a federal court rebuke of Ashcroft for trying to nullify their "right to die" law.

...it would behoove us to revisit how our founders did things and why a lot more closely.

I'm curious as to who the "us" is in this statement. I agree with the general sentiment as expressed by both Carl and Tully, that it would be a good thing for the country if more Americans understood and took proud interest in civic processes. But I think it's false nostalgia to take the view that our processes have atrophied and that government is a shadow of what it was in the days of historical lions like Jefferson, Hamilton, et. al. First I kind of doubt that it was much less messy or that people were substantially less self-interested, they just had lower expectations which were commensurate with the standard of living then. It's also important to note that the atmosphere then was one in which most people were illiterate and media was so much more limited that not too many people knew what was going on.

Who was it that said that democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others?