Size of US government? To big or to Small?

Question

I see Many people on here saying that the US gov. should be reduced in size? I also see that the US constituion says that the government needs to be representive to the size of the population? Now, beings that the populations has grown a lot since that time, wouldn't that mean that the number of people in the government should be increased not decreased? And would taking the size of government down only give more power to fewer people, getting closer to what we were trying to get rid of by writing the Constitution. We wanted the governments power to be spread out....and reducing the size would only condense the power.....and then the population to representive ratio would go down? Your thoughts please.

For the record, I do think the the government needs not get smaller in numbers, but needs to become more iffeciant. Allow the local gov. to take more control, and get rid of some services that no longer have large use.....like the ATF(which was already mentioned).....I thought this question might just spark some good thoughtful answers.....

Les gov. control? I saw the internet mentioned......they said that the gov should not control the ineternet....so are you saying that people should be allowed to exchange child porn.....there has to be some limits......total freedom will only lead to the fast fall of this country.....but you have to draw the lines.....and we keep just adding grey.....we need more black and white.

Answer 1

Without question, the federal government is much too large. Regardless of the population, read Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. There is a list of the specified powers of the federal government. Not only does the federal government intrude into areas where it is prohibited (Tenth Amendment), it neglects several of its duties. Allow me to illustrate:

..To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.... Congress has the power, and the obligation to regulate foreign trade, not to delegate that authority to a foreign, such as NAFTA and GATT.

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin... Here again, congress has created the Federal Reserve, a private, central bank to issue currency. It is the job of congress to coin money (gold and silver [Article 1, Section 10]), not to delegate that job to a private entity.

To declare war. Again, it is the job of congress to declare war, not to pass a "War Powers Act" delegating the executive branch to use the military as it sees fit.

...and repell invasions. We have been invaded by illegal aliens. The executive branch refuses to enforce the laws that congress has passed. Why hasn't congress initiated impeachment action?

As to areas where government has overstepped its bounds: education, energy, welfare, law enforcement in areas other than specified in the Constitution (espionage, counterfeiting, smuggling & c), election regulation, housing, banking, civilian disarmament (gun control), and the list goes on.

There are areas where the Founders could not have envisioned, such as allocation of broadcast frequencies and air traffic control. These areas should have been addressed by amendments. One area we definitely do not need government interferrence is the Internet. The free exchange of ideas between the people of various nations is a postive thing. Government control leads to repression and errosion of liberty.

Answer 2

It is representative to the size of population, but only in the legislative branch. That's the only place the constitution mentions where the government should be representative to the population size.

Where people, like myself, believe the government is too big is in the area of government programs. Take for example, the minimum wage. That's a popular topic.

Anyway, the government comes in and tells a business owner that he has to pay a minimum amount to their employees, regardless if some employees earn that amount or not. All it does is increase the operating expenses of that company. Do you sincerely believe that a company is just going to accept that and not do anything about it? Think again. The purpose of having a business is to make money, and they aren't going to sacrifice their profits for the sake of a government's will. So you know what they'll do, they pass the expenses on to you, Jo Shmoe consumer. That means you pay more for the goods and/or services that business provides.

There are plenty of socialist here in this country who would have you believe that government is the answer to everything, but what they fail to tell you about is the bureaucratic red tape nonsense that you have to deal with any government agency in order to get something done, when it's easier to do it yourself.

Answer 3

Well first lets create a yardstick to measure government using...
(1) Number of laws (2) Amount government spends per capita
and (3) Population growth. Lets include state government in this, because government by any other name is still government.

Now use that yardstick 100 years ago, 75 years ago, 50 years ago 25 years ago, and now (figger 2000). You do the math, then look at the graph, and voila, in only 100 years we have gone from a peaceful free republic to a totalitarian police state wherein the people have little or no control of government.

Answer 4

In the US congress there is a constant adjustment made to areas of population growth and decline. The constitution also states how many Representatives need to exist as well as senators. Size is in regards to number of States not the population that is in them. There has never been a good example of more Government doing anything that helps the electorate. The facts are that the Employees of the Government is indeed larger than ever. The issue is how you run it , not how much money and people it takes to run it.

Answer 5

Way too big. There are organizations that have outlived their purposes or were meant to be temporary but just kept going and going. Such as the ATF, these guys were made to enforce prohibition laws. Prohibition has since been repealed but yet these guys are still around, they need to be integrated with the FBI and a down size following (I don't want people to be flat out laid off, people still need to work). I disagree with dept of homeland security, should have expanded NSA's responsibilities.

When people talk about government being too big they really mean too many people on the pay role or they have too much say in our daily lives. Plus big government is wasteful which means we have to pay for waste.

Answer 6

By reducing the size of government it puts more power back into the people's hands. For instance if we were able to initiate a flat tax it would essentially eliminate the IRS. People would have more say in how their money is spent.

The government takes power from its citizens when it gets larger. Conservatives are not abdicating that the same amount of power be given to half the number of people in government. We want to see the government give some of its power back to the people.

Answer 7

You are discounting the role of local government. Government is too big especially the federal government. The constitution does not say as the country grows so should bureaucracy. Part of the ideals this country was founded on was the ability to make decisions that impact our lives close to home and not in some distant capital city by lawmakers and bureaucrats who are totally disconnected from those who are affected by them. The best way to be assured of representation is to govern locally.

Government is way too big.

Answer 8

What they mean by the size of government is the departments that control the public. Of course you would see for example Family services grow, But to give more and more control to the government is not in the peoples best interest. For example putting the government in control of our health care would be a major step back, and who trusts the government enough for them to tell you what is good for you and what is not? Do you trust the government to control if you can get an operation or not? I certainly don't.

Answer 9

When people say they want a smaller gov., They are reffering to the scope of the Gov. influences not the physical size. they want the Gov. to stop controlling everything and let people decide for themselves on issues. The people in America are getting lazy and making the Government decide things for them. We are voting away our freedoms. If you are interested in a smaller Government Check out the Liberterian Party.

Answer 10

So how about all governmental salaries be abolished? Make politics strictly a volunteer position. Don't pay a penny to your local representative, or state senator. See how much of the chaff falls out at that shaking, and find out what you are left with.

Just maybe, it will be people who really care for the country, and the people in it?