This chapter describes how the principles of self- and limited government are embodied in the Constitution and explains the tension between them. These are the chapter’s main points:

The Constitution of the United States reflects the colonial and revolutionary experiences of early Americans. Freedom from abusive government was a reason for the colonies’ revolt against British rule, but the English tradition also provided ideas about government, power, and freedom that were expressed in the Constitution and, earlier, in the Declaration of Independence.

After declaring independence from Britain, America formed a central government under the Articles of Confederation. Wary of governmental power because of the colonial experience, the authors of the Articles created a very weak central government. However, economic problems, national security concerns, and internal disturbances soon demonstrated the need for a stronger central government and led Congress to call a convention in 1787 to revise the Articles. However, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention ignored that directive, choosing instead to create a new political system for America.

The Constitution forged at that convention was designed to provide for a government in which political power would limited yet adequate to govern. The Framers wanted to ensure that the government they were creating would not itself be a threat to freedom. Delegates to the convention struggled with many issues, especially how to allocate seats in Congress and how to deal with the issue of slavery. A series of compromises were struck.

The framers confined the national government to expressly granted powers and also denied it certain specific powers. Other prohibitions on government were later added to the Constitution in the form of stated guarantees of individual liberties—the Bill of Rights. The most significant constitutional provision for limited government, however, was a distribution of powers among the three branches. The powers given to each branch enable it to act as a check on the exercise of power by the others.

The Constitution, however, made no mention of how the powers and limits of government were to be judged in practice. In its historic 1803 ruling in Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court assumed the authority to review the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions and to declare them unconstitutional and thus invalid. The Constitution has also contributed to limited government, particularly though its provisions for the separation of powers and its stated guarantees of individual rights.

Since 1787, a major issue of American politics has been the public’s role in governing. The Framers of the Constitution respected the idea of self-government but distrusted popular majorities. They designed a government that they felt would temper popular opinion and slow its momentum, so that the public’s "true interest" (which includes a regard for the right and interests of the minority) would guide public policy. Different methods were established to select members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, the president, and federal judges as a means of separating political power from momentary and unreflecting majorities. The philosophy of representative democracy was suggested in the writings of Burke, Locke, and Montesquieu and still has strong advocates today.

Since the adoption of the Constitution, however, the public has gradually assumed more direct control of its representatives, particularly through measures affecting the way officeholders are chosen. Political parties, presidential voting (linked to the electoral college), and primary elections are among the devices aimed at strengthening the majority’s influence. These developments are rooted in the idea, deeply held by ordinary Americans, that the people must have substantial direct control of their government if it is to serve their real interests. For advocates of majority rule, the alternative is government by privileged interest.

Today, the United States has a political system that is a model of popular rule but is also less democratic than some other political systems. Separation of powers sometimes paralyzes the government’s ability to made quick and decisive decisions, but the system also protects against abuses of power and hasty, unwise policies.