Which idea is illustrated by the statement that people grant powers to government in order to limit its authority?

Which idea is illustrated by the statement that people grant powers to government in order to limit its authority?

• A. People grant rights to government to limit its power
• B. People grant no rights and government has unlimited power
• C. The people must abolish government
• D. The government must not protect rights

Answer: (A)

The idea being tested is that government derives its authority from the people and is deliberately kept within limits to prevent abuse. This is the essence of the social contract: citizens consent to give government power to enforce laws and maintain order, but only within those defined boundaries. By granting certain powers, the people create a framework—often a constitution, with checks and balances—so that the government can operate to protect rights while being restrained from overstepping. Why this fits best: the statement portrays consent from the governed to empower a government specifically to limit and regulate its own power. That tension—granting authority to govern while constraining that authority to protect liberties—is the core idea of a limited government. Why the other ideas don’t fit: imagining no rights granted and unlimited power contradicts the whole premise of permission and constraint; abolishing government discards the mechanism for maintaining order and protecting rights; and the notion that the government must not protect rights runs directly against the purpose of giving government authority in the first place.

The idea being tested is that government derives its authority from the people and is deliberately kept within limits to prevent abuse. This is the essence of the social contract: citizens consent to give government power to enforce laws and maintain order, but only within those defined boundaries. By granting certain powers, the people create a framework—often a constitution, with checks and balances—so that the government can operate to protect rights while being restrained from overstepping.

Why this fits best: the statement portrays consent from the governed to empower a government specifically to limit and regulate its own power. That tension—granting authority to govern while constraining that authority to protect liberties—is the core idea of a limited government.

Why the other ideas don’t fit: imagining no rights granted and unlimited power contradicts the whole premise of permission and constraint; abolishing government discards the mechanism for maintaining order and protecting rights; and the notion that the government must not protect rights runs directly against the purpose of giving government authority in the first place.