Government That Governs Least the Best Sort

¶ … government that governs least the best sort of government for a freedom-Loving nation to have.

Does the Government that Governs Least Govern the Best?: A Closer Look

That government is best which governs least." This statement has been attributed to Thomas Jefferson, though there is no actual evidence of the statement in any of his extant writings. Whether Jefferson originally made this famous saying or not is inconsequential. The fact is, this saying has been repeated countless times over the past two centuries by proponents of democracy, states' rights, civil liberties, and all sorts of other precepts upon which our nation was supposedly founded. Those who believe that a true freedom-loving democracy consists of a government that stays out of the business of its citizens as much as possible are many and loud. There are many historically famous people who can be counted among the ranks of those who believe the government governs best which governs least. However, is this really the case? Can a government which does not govern much at all really be an effective government? Even more importantly, can a government that does not govern much protect and preserve the very democracy and freedom which created it in the first place? This paper looks at the writings of Alex de Tocqueville -- specifically his novel Democracy in America -- in order to determine if the government which governs least really is best.

Alex de Tocqueville made some startling observations about America and its institution of democracy. De Tocqueville saw how the experiment of democracy had failed in his native France, and was intrigued as to how democracy was faring in America. America at this time was, after all, the only true operating democracy in the world. De Tocqueville hoped that by coming to America to observe how it practiced its democracy that he could determine just where France had gone wrong in its democratic experiment. The observations that de Tocqueville made about democracy in America formed the basis for his novel, Democracy in America. These observations also offer us many important insights into the nature of our democracy today, and how we might be in danger of losing it.

For most of the history of the United States, the idea that the government should not be very strong and should leave the people mainly to themselves has been a common theme of opinion among both the people and the politicians. It was certainly the common idea of the day when the Articles of Confederation were installed as our first constitution. The Articles of Confederation created a weak, loose league of friendship between the states, but established no real sort of federal government. The federal government it did create had no power beyond what the states gave it. As a result, nothing much ever got done, and the government and the states soon found out that the United States as a whole was not able to pay its bills, regulate its commerce, or ensure domestic tranquility. The new country quickly got heavily into debt and was plagued by civil uprisings it could not control. Yet in spite of this, there was still a huge public resistance to the ratification of the Constitution, which was the replacement to the Articles of Confederation. The Constitution established a much stronger central government, with significantly more power than was had under the Articles of Confederation. People were afraid that a central government with much power at all would soon become despotic like the king of England. It was the common belief that local governments were the best choice for governing the nation.

However, de Tocqueville determined through his observations that even the much stronger central government that was created by the Constitution was too weak in a lot of ways to ensure the preservation of democracy. This may seem like a contradiction at first -- after all, how can a strong, powerful government ensure democracy and freedom?. However, through his observations, de Tocqueville showed that this is precisely what is needed for democracy and freedom to continue.

Alexis de Tocqueville became concerned through his observations that the legislative branch of the government was too powerful. However, he was also concerned that the president and the judiciary were not powerful enough. The legislative branch of the government is, of course, Congress, and Congress is directly elected by the people. Because of this, most people naturally assume that Congress will be the most responsive to the will of the people of any branch of government, and so power is greatly concentrated in the legislative branch. After all, won't the branch that is directly responsible to the people take great pains to make sure that the freedom and democracy that are so valued by the people are preserved? Not necessarily, according to de Tocqueville. In de Tocqueville's view, any branch of government that has too much power concentrated in it has the potential to become despotic.

Even though de Tocqueville is concerned about too much power in one branch of government, he is also concerned about not enough power in the government as a whole. For example, he is concerned that the president has the ability to be re-elected, as by being able to be re-elected the president has to be concerned with what the people think and how to please the people, rather than concentrating on his job and making the best decisions for the people, even those that may be politically unpopular. He is also concerned that the people directly elect the members of the House of Representatives (at the time the novel was written, senators were indirectly elected by state legislatures). Since the House of Representatives is such a large body, to have its members being elected to such short terms and hence always caught up in doing what was necessary to get re-elected meant that these members were also not concentrating on dong what was good for the country. The senators, who were indirectly elected and to much longer terms, seemed to be more stable and sensible in their decisions than the House of Representatives.

Further, de Tocqueville worried that the very nature of freedom in our country, where the government did largely stay out of the private lives of its citizens, could be a threat to the preservation of that freedom. He was concerned that by becoming more and more focused on themselves as individuals, as a democracy of the nature of the United States had a tendency to encourage, the people of the United States would neglect their civic duties, would not vote, and would only care about their own individual comfort. De Tocqueville was concerned that this could eventually lead to the people putting a benevolent despot in charge who would ensure their material comfort and security, as individualism would make these things more important to the people than true freedom.