Is the American system inefficient? What did the founders intend to gain by sacrificing efficiency?

Question

What impediments to efficiency were written into the Constitution and what were their intended purposes?

Answer 1

One of the most important lines from the Federalist Papers is Madison's classic statement that, in the United States, "ambition counter[s] ambition." Often when we view the American system today, it is easy to see an inefficient bureaucracy incapacitated by political gridlock. But, at least to some extent, this is by design. The founders feared concentration of power and the system they built was not intended to be efficient, but rather it was built (above all else) for power to check power. Hamilton argued that one of the greatest fears in any republic is the 'tyranny of the majority,' wherein whichever factions are in power tyrannize those which are not in power. His solution to the tyranny of the majority was to create a large republic of diverse interests, each checking one another and preventing any one faction from seizing too much authority.

 

This 'power to check power' point of view is evident in every facet of American government. Most prominently, we can see it in the checks and balances between the different branches. Our system is bicameral (two houses of congress). These two houses not only have to share power with each other but also with the executive and the courts. Our system is also federal. The national government is itself limited, the majority of policy-making responsibility left to the states.

 

While this system often appears inefficient, it was intended to maximize the legitimacy of government and to limit the inevitable effects of corruption. If all members of the government are seeking their own interests, the best system, the founders thought, would be one that pits their ambitions against each other, and in doing so, facilitates compromise.

 

Compromise and checks and balances create the legitimacy that gives our system integrity, even if this comes at the cost of efficiency.

Answer 2

In addition to what Brooks said, I would like to add that the Constitution was written at a highly different time in American history. At the time, America was in its infancy--with only 13 colonies, all bordering the Atlantic coast, with westward expansion having never been foreseen. Slavery was in full swing. Women were treated as people without any rights. The country was in a state of war--hence the ramifications of the Second Amendment, which dictated the founders' thought process when penning the Constitution to begin with. Basically, the U.S. Constitution even to this day is still a rough draft in dire need of revision, despite the addition of the 11th-27th Amendments post-the original ten amendments completed in 1791 after having been proposed two years earlier in 1789. In general, efficiency was not a priority for the founding fathers given the chain of events that lead up to and immediately following America becoming an independent nation on July 4, 1776. The U.S. Constitution was a reflection of that period in American and even world history. Other than governmental operations, the founding fathers and predominantly wealthy White male population of the American nation in the late 1700s exhibited short-term thinking when it came to developing the legal document that has since dictated the sociopolitical and economic operative outlook of the country for more than 200 years at this point in time.

If you are planning (or required) to write an essay about the above topic, I would also suggest comparing and contrasting the founding fathers' emphasis on democracy vs. efficiency in regards to the U.S. Constitution's long-term law-abiding implications in the area of governmental operations to boot.