Martin Anderson's "A Six-Day Plan for Reagan" {op-ed, June 16} is troubling in several respects. This missive from on high to on higher recommends that President Reagan urge the states to call a constitutional convention ostensibly for the sole purpose of drafting a balanced-budget amendment. Not only is his premise that a convention could be limited to a single subject flawed, he also ignores the international implications of such a convocation.

If James Madison was justifiably concerned over the foreign policy implications of a U.S. constitutional convention in the 18th century, our concern should be multiplied by the infinitely more prominent world role our country plays in the 20th century. Further disruptions of our vital foreign policy interests -- NATO, as an example -- are disturbing to contemplate.

To suggest that the president begin promoting a constitutional convention is a disservice, and grossly underestimates the public's patience with individuals who recklessly disregard the possible consequences of such action.

The eve of the bicentennial is not an appropriate occasion for subjecting the Constitution to wholesale negotiation and change. Instead, the occasion should be marked by celebrating the durability and efficacy of our Constitution, the rights and liberties it has provided for its people and the example of personal freedom it has set for the world. LINDA ROGERS-KINGSBURY Washington