The limits of generality for constitutional design
指出詹姆斯·布坎南主张将非歧视政治写入宪法，但宪法语言易被政治企业家操纵解释，美国宪法史证明了这一点，因此建议更关注程序性而非实质性宪法条款。
Abstract James Buchanan was a fervent advocate of a non-discriminatory politics. However, he translated his views on constitutional political economy into ( de jure ) constitutional design in an insufficiently thoughtful way. Simply writing non-discriminatory politics into a Constitution is unlikely to have the desired effect. All Constitutional language is open to interpretation and political entrepreneurs will be ready to push interpretation in their favoured directions. The history of US Constitutional law bears this out. This does not necessarily discount Buchanan's quest for constitutionalized non-discriminatory politics. However, it does mean that it must be tempered by realistic concerns regarding constitutional design. With this in mind, I suggest that focusing on procedural, rather than substantive, Constitutional provisions may be more fruitful.