MEDIA CONTACT: Pat Vaughan Tremmel at (847) 491-4892 or at p-tremmel@northwestern.edu

January 3, 2003

New Book Examines American Democracy

CHICAGO --- American democracy is among the most durable forms of government in the world despite "counter-majoritaran" tendencies, according to a new book, "Talking It Through: Puzzles of American Democracy" (Cornell University Press).

The book, by Robert Bennett, the Nathaniel L. Nathanson Professor, constitutional law scholar and former dean of Northwestern University School of Law, points to arguments -- from the left, right and center -- decrying examples of counter-majoritarianism, including scholars’ longstanding debates about judicial review, as somewhat misguided in addressing how our government works or doesn’t work.

Instead, Bennett employs a novel conversational – rather than "majoritarian" -- account of what holds our nation together. By solving four puzzles of America democracy, he shows how our government acts as an extraordinary engine for producing conversation about public affairs that involves the entire adult citizenry.

The book points out, for example, how the assignment of two senators to each state means that California’s 40 some odd million people have the same senatorial representation as Wyoming’s 450,000. "With its apportionment by states, the U.S. Senate is the most ‘malapportioned’ elected legislative body in the world," Bennett says.

But despite the routine characterization of American democracy as majoritarian, he argues, there is very little controversy about Senate apportionment. Employing his conversational account of what holds American democracy together, Bennett solves this puzzle of inattention to Senate apportionment and a variety of other puzzles of American democracy.

Fed by the incentives of electoral competition and a variety of other features of America’s version of democracy -- federalism, bicameralism, a separately elected executive, geographic legislative districting and heightened protection of speech and press -- politicians, public officials, and media of communication produce, according to the book, a diverse conversational menu which has the effect of instilling a sense of involvement by the citizenry in the enterprise as a whole.

"The Senate is actually an extremely effective vehicle for democratic conversation, and this accounts for inattention to its apportionment," Bennett concludes.

In similar fashion, Bennett deploys a conversational explanation for lawyers’ and law professors’ fixation on constitutional review by the courts as posing what Alexander Bickel called a "counter-majoritarian difficulty." This is awkward terminology at best, according to Bennett, given

inattention to the "counter-majoritarian" Senate. A better explanation for the angst about judicial review is that the courts are "counter-conversational."

Other theorists have discussed democratic conversation, but usually to criticize its extent and content. Bennett seeks instead to explore the explanatory power of the conversation that does take place.

Bennett devotes a chapter to the puzzle of indifference to the political "no man’s land" to which children are relegated in American democracy. Another chapter deals with the "paradox of voting," just why it is that so many of us vote when the motivation for doing so in terms of our self-interest is not apparent. Bennett also touches more fleetingly on a variety of other puzzles, like why citizens seem to have higher opinions of their own representatives than of legislative bodies as a whole, and why foreign born citizens are not upset by the constitutional requirement that the President be a "natural born citizen."

During the 2000 election, Bennett was quoted extensively by national media. Afterward he and colleagues at Northwestern organized a conference on election related problems, including Bennett’s own contribution on the Electoral College.

An active scholar and constitutional theorist, Bennett joined the Law School in 1969 and served as its dean from 1985 to 1995. Also active in professional affairs, he helped found the Chicago Council of Lawyers and was President of the American Bar Foundation from 1992 to 1994. He has argued in the United States Supreme Court and has been a professional arbitrator and mediator.