Is there a party proposing that we adjudicate court cases by popular vote?
Has someone suggested constitutional amendments be passed by simple majorities?
Has someone suggested universal resident voting, enfranchising infants and non-citizens equally?
*EVERYONE* supports franchise restrictions and curtailments of majority power!
But we're all debating about edge cases here.
And if we remove one or two checks on majorities, it doesn't mean that a tide of revolutionary torch-bearers is coming for us all.
They still have courts!
We don't allow majorities to decide things because they are *just or wise*.
Popular opinion probably tends towards no particular truth value.
In the US, it's less than half that, and much of it is explained by non-citizens and children.
They got 61% of the seats in the legislature!
We're quite average!
Please note that changing polling place availability will mostly not impact voter registration rates. Voter ID laws won't change whether somebody registered.
But like, empirically, the difference between us and other countries isn't those policies. It's low voter registration.
But that's.... not super high on either side's political agenda, actually.
The U.S. system could stand to be improved!
But it is not a uniquely non-majoritarian system. Many parliamentary systems create VASTLY greater mismatches of votes/power.
But hold up. It flipped HARD in favor of Democrats in 2008. And it's not like Dem vote share in 2008 was crazy high. The only added to 206 by about 1% of votes cast. Only 53% of total votes.
My point is that the election bias measures aren't really measuring structural bias. They're just measuring the historic idiosyncracies of electoral coalitions.
It is not consistent which party over/under performs, the scores varying across time and election type.
I am on record supporting MASSIVE structural reforms! It's literally in my handle! Here's a link to my argument: mereorthodoxy.com/congressional-…
But I do think GOP mistakes are a bigger factor.
That is a very bad strategy!
More people will die!
1. The US has lots of non-majoritarian institutions, and before filibuster was ended, you need much more than a majority to govern alone. i.e. "spurious majorities" didn't yield real power. That's begun to change (thanks Reid)
They may both be unjust! Or both just!
No it doesn't. Across 15 developed-world proportional representation systems, seat share of the winner exceeded vote share by an average of 4.2% in recent elections. US averages 4.7%.
We just aren't that weird, folks.