Limited Government
Ronald Reagan once said, “I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: as a government expands, liberty contracts.” Ronald Reagan promoted a more restrictive government that allows Americans the freedoms outlined by our current laws and regulations. By definition, a limited government means that the constitution limits the actions of the government, making one branch equal to the next. Limited government makes it so the social safety net of our citizens is weakened, although our founding fathers created a government by limiting the powers of each branch to make for a better Democracy system.
Within our government system there are checks and balances that prevent the abuse of power by any of the branches of government. For example, Congress passes laws that the President can either approve or veto. Congress can override a veto by a two-thirds vote from each house. Federal courts restrain Congress by ruling on the constitutionality of laws (Remy 66). This circle of checks and balances creates a system of shared powers allowing each branch to contribute to a balance of authority, strengthening our Democracy government.
In addition to a system of checks and balances, another advantage to limited government is popular sovereignty and separation of power. Separation of powers comes from the Constitution, stating that each branch of our government has its responsibilities, a system that prevents any branch from gaining too much power. The Constitution is based on the idea of popular sovereignty; the authority for government comes from the people of the United States (Remy 65). Without popular sovereignty, there is no Democracy, so this principle is needed in a government that Abraham Lincoln said to be, “By the people, for the people.”
Alternately, limited government weakens the social safety net of its citizens. This means that there is less help for those who can’t help themselves. Although taxes may provide for social programs within our government, there may be an unequal distribution of prosperity. Safety net transfers include cash transfers, public works, and free waiver; the government would be giving less help to the chronic poor and the transient citizens (Business Dictionary). Thus, a limited government has its drawbacks for all citizens.
In conclusion, by limiting the powers of our bodies of government, we provide a system of checks and balances, promote popular sovreignty and encourage but do not guarantee social prosperity. The United States Constitution was designed to limit the powers of each branch of government equalizing their roles. As Ronald Reagan stated so precisely, “as government expands, liberty contracts.” This statement summarizes the effects of too much government involvement. In other words, our liberties that we cherish are jeopardized by any unbalance of government power.
Within our government system there are checks and balances that prevent the abuse of power by any of the branches of government. For example, Congress passes laws that the President can either approve or veto. Congress can override a veto by a two-thirds vote from each house. Federal courts restrain Congress by ruling on the constitutionality of laws (Remy 66). This circle of checks and balances creates a system of shared powers allowing each branch to contribute to a balance of authority, strengthening our Democracy government.
In addition to a system of checks and balances, another advantage to limited government is popular sovereignty and separation of power. Separation of powers comes from the Constitution, stating that each branch of our government has its responsibilities, a system that prevents any branch from gaining too much power. The Constitution is based on the idea of popular sovereignty; the authority for government comes from the people of the United States (Remy 65). Without popular sovereignty, there is no Democracy, so this principle is needed in a government that Abraham Lincoln said to be, “By the people, for the people.”
Alternately, limited government weakens the social safety net of its citizens. This means that there is less help for those who can’t help themselves. Although taxes may provide for social programs within our government, there may be an unequal distribution of prosperity. Safety net transfers include cash transfers, public works, and free waiver; the government would be giving less help to the chronic poor and the transient citizens (Business Dictionary). Thus, a limited government has its drawbacks for all citizens.
In conclusion, by limiting the powers of our bodies of government, we provide a system of checks and balances, promote popular sovreignty and encourage but do not guarantee social prosperity. The United States Constitution was designed to limit the powers of each branch of government equalizing their roles. As Ronald Reagan stated so precisely, “as government expands, liberty contracts.” This statement summarizes the effects of too much government involvement. In other words, our liberties that we cherish are jeopardized by any unbalance of government power.