With regard to vowel-centric versus consonant-centric languages, English tends to be consonant-centric, and that's partly why our spelling is difficult. For example, "flutter" could be spelled "fluttr": we don't need the 2nd vowel and thus wouldn't have to guess whether it's spelled "fluttur", "fluttor", etc. English could use a refactoring. Examples: http://wiki.c2.com/?RefactorEnglish
What you're referring to is essentially schwa-reduction. Unstressed vowels in English get reduced to a neutral vowel sound (represented by schwa, an upside-down e), and different letters are used to represent that vowel depending more or less on linguistic history.
But vowels do matter in English. Consider the following words that differ only in the vowel they use: bat, bait, bit, bot, bite, boat, boot, butt, bet, beat, bout. Furthermore, all of those words refer to very different things. Semitic languages are based on a triconsonantal scheme, where three consonants define a root, and the choice of vowels implies inflection. Dropping the vowels in Semitic languages does not impair meaning all that much.
I didn't intend to imply all vowels can be dropped or wild-carded in English. As far as schwa, if we do refactor English, we should probably stick to existing "normal" letters rather than introduce symbols such as an explicit schwa. I agree this risks either ambiguity, or some potentially non-obvious rules to remember.
As it is, I feel sorry for non-native English learners; English's spelling is a mess. The only saving grace is that being semi-phonetic means one can often make a decent guess.
After you start phonetic punning, most writing systems drop the pictographic portion and become solely based on phonetic constituents (Chinese being the major exception, although Japanese did evolve the next step into kana). These constituents are usually roughly based on a consonant-vowel pair and writing systems in this phase are called syllabries, but they're often not really full syllables, and there are tricks for representing more complex syllables (for example, Mayan uses the principle that the syllable pattern CVC is represented with CV-CV, where the vowel is the same in both characters.).
Now, in Phoenician or thereabouts, an interesting turn happened. Because of the nature of Semitic languages, the syllabry form dropped all of the vowels and just represented the consonants (what's now termed an abjad). The Indo-European speakers (principally Etruscan and Greek) who borrowed from this alphabet repurposed some of the letters which corresponded to missing consonants (such as the glottal stop in 'aleph) to represent vowels instead, as vowels are rather more important in those languages. Other languages that borrowed from abjads indicated vowels with systematic vowel marks, such as Devanagari or Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics; these are known as abugidas. Virtually every alphabet, abjad, and abugida known to exist is believed to derive originally from this first "wrong" turn when developing syllabaries.
An interesting point when discussing the history of writing systems is the development of the Cherokee script. The Cherokee script was invented by Sequoyah, who developed it entirely on the basis that he knew that the white settlers had a writing system that could be reliably read and a copy of the Bible but without any other knowledge of writing. He originally attempted to develop a mapping of word => character, but realized that the mapping is too complex, especially since the text he had got by with much fewer characters. Instead, he chose a syllabary, borrowing some of the letter forms from Latin script but not their phonetic mappings (which is why ᏣᎳᎩ is actually pronounced "tsalagi").