After much thought and research, I have come to the conclusion that the whole Big Govt vs Small Govt discussion is invalid. I know of no one who truly advocates small government per se. SMALLER govt., most assuredly, but not SMALL government. Reading the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution - including the federalist papers - I see nothing DIRECTLY addressing the size of government.
What I DO see is the concept of LIMITED government - limited in SCOPE, limited in POWER. The 10th Amendment is all about limiting the scope and power of the central government. Here is the 10 Amendment in its entirety: (all 27 words)
Amendment 10
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to
the people.
The import is clear. The central government has ONLY the powers EXPLICITLY GRANTED it in the Constitution. EVERY OTHER power or right is reserved to the States or to the people. Period.
The constitution is a fence to CONTAIN the central government. It says "Thus far you may go AND NO FARTHER!". Article I, Section 8 has a list of some 20 powers Congress is authorized to exercise. Article I, Section 9 has a long list of things Congress is NOT authorized to do. Article II lists what the Executive is authorized to do. Article III addresses the power of the Judiciary.
In the Founders' minds, the central government had no power or authority NOT EXPLICITLY GRANTED IT in the Constitution. That is the essence of limited government.
Given the history of the decades before the framing of the Constitution, it is easy to see why the Founders were of this mindset. They were still recovering from a war fought against an essentially unlimited government in the person of the English Crown and the Parliament. They wanted a government that had very explicit and well defined boundaries. They wanted no part of unlimited, overreaching government - and took great pains to see that such never arose.
In the Declaration of Independence, the Founders articulated their vision of the purpose of government - to protect the Creator-endowed rights of men. In the Constitution they devised a framework for a system to do that - AND NO MORE.
In part 2 of this essay, I shall attempt to articulate what I believe to be a rule of thumb for the maximum size of government.
In closing this part, I would ask of those who seem so enamored of ever growing government this question.
How likely do you think it is that a government large enough and powerful enough to do everything you think it should do would be interesting in doing anything YOU want it to do?