archy, aristocracy, and democracy, seeing none as ideal, but a mix of the three useful by combining the best aspects of each. James Harrington, in his 1656 Oceana, brought these ideas up-to-date and proposed systems based on the separation of power.
Many of the framers of the U.S. Constitution, such as Madison, studied history and political philosophy. They greatly appreciated the idea of separation of power on the grounds of their complex views of governmental power. Their experience with the Articles of Confederation taught them that the national government must have the power needed to achieve the purposes for which it was to be established. At the same time, they were worried about the concentration of power in one person’s hands. As John Adams wrote in his A Defense of the Constitution of Government of the United States of America (1787), “It is undoubtedly honorable in any man, who has acquired a great influence, unbounded confidence, and unlimited power, to resign it voluntarily; and odious to take advantage of such an opportunity to destroy a free government: but it would be madness in a legislator to frame his policy upon a supposition that such magnanimity would often appear. It is his business to contrive his plan in such a manner that such unlimited influence, confidence, and power, shall never be obtained by any man.” (Isaak 2004:100) Such worries compelled the framers to find a good way to establish a new government, thus separation of powers and a balanced government became a good choice.
Two political theorists had great influence on the creation of the Constitution. John Locke, an important British political philosopher, had a large impact through his Second Treatise of Government (1690). Locke argued that sovereignty resides in individuals, not rulers. A political state, he theorized, emerged from a social contract among the people, who consent to government in order to preserve their lives, liberties, and property. In the words of the Declaration of Independence, which also drew heavily on Locke, governments derive “their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Locke also pioneered the idea of the separation of powers, and he separated the powers into an executive and a legislature. The French political philosopher Baron de Montesquieu, another major intellectual influence on the Constitution, further developed the concept of separation of powers in his treatise The Spirit of the Laws (1748), which was highly regarded by the framers of the U.S. Constitution. Montesquieu’s basic contention was that those entrusted with power tend to abuse it; therefore, if governmental power is fragmented, each power will operate as a check on the others. In its usual operational form, one branch of government (the legislative) is entrusted with making laws, a second (the executive) with executing them, and a third (the judiciary) with resolving disputes in accordance with the law.
Based on the theory of Baron de Montesquieu and John Locke, the framers carefully spelled out the independence of the three branches of government: executive, legislative, and judicial. At the same time, however, they provided for a system in which some powers should be shared: Congress may pass laws, but the president can veto them; the president nominates certain public officials, but Congress must approve the appointments; and laws passed by Congress as well as executive actions are subject to judicial review. Thus the separation of powers is offset by what are called checks and balances.
2. Separation of Powers among Three Governmental Branches
Separation of powers devised by the framers of the U.S. Constitution serves the goals: to prevent concentration of power and provide each branch with weapons to fight off encroachment by the other two branches. As James Madison argued in the Federalist Papers (No.51), “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.” Clearly, the system of separated powers is not designed to maximize efficiency; it is designed to maximize freedom. In the Constitution of the United States, the Legislative, comp