The Federalist and Anti-Federalist Agreement on Limited Government

The shared commitment to limited government is evident in the writings and speeches of both Federalists and Anti-Federalists. The Constitution, as James Madison emphasized in Federalist No. 45, was designed to create a government with "few and defined" powers:

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."

Madison’s reassurance was critical to winning over skeptics, particularly those who feared a federal government that might encroach upon state authority or individual liberties.

On the Anti-Federalist side, similar concerns are echoed. In Brutus No. 1, the anonymous author expressed deep skepticism about the federal government exceeding its enumerated powers but emphasized that the Constitution should strictly limit federal authority:

"The powers of the general legislature extend to every case that is of the least importance; there is no need to limit them if they are to remain faithful to the expressed enumeration of powers."

The Anti-Federalists feared that ambiguous clauses like the Necessary and Proper Clause or the Supremacy Clause might allow for the expansion of federal power, but they agreed with the Federalists in principle that the Constitution was supposed to limit the government to specific, enumerated powers.

Enumerated Powers: A Common Ground

Both sides saw the enumerated powers as the foundation of limited government. Enumerated powers ensured that the federal government could not arbitrarily assume authority over areas of governance that belonged to the states or the people.

The Tenth Amendment, added to the Constitution as part of the Bill of Rights in 1791, is a direct reflection of this shared principle:

"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."

This amendment explicitly codified the agreement that the federal government could exercise only those powers granted to it by the Constitution.

Debate over Implementation, Not Principle

The Federalists and Anti-Federalists diverged primarily on their confidence in whether the Constitution, as drafted, would effectively restrain federal power.

Federalists, such as Madison and Hamilton, believed that the structure of the Constitution—with its checks and balances, separation of powers, and enumerated authority—was sufficient to prevent the overreach of the federal government. They argued that the federal government needed a certain degree of power to function effectively but that it would remain limited by design.

Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, worried that the Constitution’s provisions were too ambiguous and that the federal government would find ways to expand its authority. Patrick Henry warned at the Virginia Ratifying Convention that the federal government’s potential for abuse was too great without more explicit safeguards:

"The Constitution is an instrument for the people to restrain the government, lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."

This fear led the Anti-Federalists to demand a Bill of Rights to explicitly delineate individual freedoms and further constrain federal power.

Modern Lessons from the Founding Debates

The agreement on enumerated powers offers crucial lessons for contemporary governance. The Founders’ shared principle of limited government is too often ignored today, as federal authority has expanded far beyond its original boundaries. Programs and policies that lack a constitutional basis would likely alarm both Federalists and Anti-Federalists alike.

As James Madison warned in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, when the principle of enumerated powers is abandoned, the Constitution becomes meaningless:

"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, without clear constraints, the powers of Congress would subvert the very foundation of limited government, leading to an expansion of federal authority that undermines states' rights and individual liberties."

Refocusing on the Founders’ Intent

Restoring constitutional governance requires returning to the principle of enumerated powers. Both Federalists and Anti-Federalists envisioned a government that operated within clear boundaries, leaving most authority with the states and the people. By embracing their shared commitment to limited government, Americans can honor the Constitution’s original intent and ensure the preservation of liberty for future generations.

In the end, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists may have differed on how best to secure liberty, but they were united in their belief that the federal government must remain constrained. That principle remains as vital today as it was in 1787.