That's a tough comparison to make. The framers lived in a drastically different world with regards to the size and scope of the federal government.
They design a federal government that was purposely hamstrung by the states. It was poorly funded, had no standing military, only briefly had a federal bank, and had very limited purview of authority that didn't fall down to the state level.
If we want to remove bureaucracy while also rolling back many of the federal powers created over the last century or so I'd be all for it.
Removing one without the other either seems pointless (bureaucracy without authority) or risky (authority without bureaucracy) in my opinion.
They design a federal government that was purposely hamstrung by the states. It was poorly funded, had no standing military, only briefly had a federal bank, and had very limited purview of authority that didn't fall down to the state level.
If we want to remove bureaucracy while also rolling back many of the federal powers created over the last century or so I'd be all for it.
Removing one without the other either seems pointless (bureaucracy without authority) or risky (authority without bureaucracy) in my opinion.