Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Make a choice: majoritarian democracy or minority tyranny?

majority vs minority
Sanga Park/Getty Images

Nelson is a retired attorney and served as an associate justice of the Montana Supreme Court from 1993 through 2012.

What is more American than majority rule — the principle that 50.1 percent carries the day when decisions affecting all of us are made? The majority wins, and the minority has to accept, even if not graciously, the decision of the greater number. That’s how decisions are made in this country. Right?

Not necessarily!


In their recent book, “The Tyranny of the Minority,” authors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblat dissect the majority-rules rule and show it to be, in many cases, more fiction than fact. Often our political system, our fundamental rights, and our democracy are held hostage and fettered by a minority-rules rule that not only has been institutionalized but, in certain instances, originated in the Constitution itself.

To summarize is to do an injustice to the thorough and enlightening analysis that the authors bring to this subject. But, it’s important that we — the majority — at least have a working understanding of what is driving the dysfunctional, ineffective, and toxic three-ring circus that characterizes our federal and state politics — and that is propelling our country out of democracy and into authoritarianism and fascism.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Levitsky and Ziblatt discuss at length a number of counter-majoritarian institutions that fetter majority rule and which substitute minority rule in its place.

These counter-majoritarian institutions include:

  • The Bill of Rights, which unambiguously protects individual liberties against the whims of temporary majorities. Yet, many of these rights have remained ill-defined and unevenly protected for much of American history. Consider abortion — protected as a federal constitutional right for 50 years, only to be disavowed by Supreme Court partisan ideologues and put in the hands of state partisans. Conservative Christian legislatures enacted a wave of draconian laws out of step with nearly 70 percent of Americans who support reproductive choice. Indeed, religious freedom has become a super-right that serves to support discrimination (against LGBTQIA+ people) and minority white, Christian nationalism (about 20 percent).
  • The Supreme Court (and other federal courts), with justices and judges appointed for life. They are accountable to no one, yet, for multiple generations, exercise the power of judicial review to block majority-backed laws that do not threaten democracy.
  • Federalism, often viewed as a bulwark against dangerous national majorities. But for much of American history federalism has permitted state and local governments to egregiously violate fundamental rights. For example, the right to vote is subverted and suppressed by state and local laws and gerrymandering favoring one political party.
  • The bicameral Congress. Two different bodies (the House and the Senate) are required to pass legislation — a frequently demonstrated impossibility when different parties control each chamber and where one party is controlled by a minority.
  • The Senate. Severely malapportioned, the Senate provides over-representation of small-population states at the expense of populous states, thus diluting the votes of the citizens of the latter.
  • The filibuster. Legislative demigods, with axes to grind or personal ideologies to promote, are empowered to block majoritarian legislation and thereby frustrate majority rule.
  • The Electoral College. A historical artifact, it is opposed by nearly 60 percent of Americans because it permits the election of presidents who have lost — often by huge margins — the popular, majority vote.
  • Supermajority requirements for reforming the Constitution. That would include disposing of the Electoral College and enacting the Equal Rights Amendment.

Again, this is a very short summary of the authors’ lengthy discussion; the book is a good read.

Change is necessary to protect the ability of the majority of We the People to protect our fundamental rights and our democracy, and to prevent our spiraling journey into authoritarianism and fascism led by a powerful, well-funded minority of politicians.

Much of this change requires reforming anti-majoritarian provisions and institutions enshrined in the Constitution itself. While that’s a hard sell, we need to start.

Majoritarian democracy, or tyranny of the minority. It’s our choice to make.

Read More

Donald Trump

Former President Donald Trump

Jabin Botsford/Getty Images

Scholars unmask Trump election lawyers’ use of falsified evidence

Rosenfeld is the editor and chief correspondent of Voting Booth, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

After 2022’s midterm election, I had an email exchange with Robert Beadles, a combative northern Nevada businessman and Donald Trump devotee. His post-2020 hounding of Reno’s top election official had pushed her to resign. Beadles didn’t trust the midterm results either and offered a $50,000 reward to anyone who’d prove that it was not stolen.

Easy money, right? Beadles’ distrust was tribal. But his reward hinged on refuting a statistical analysis that he waved like the flag. His statistician, Edward Solomon, who lived halfway across the country, found mathematical aberrations in the results that he didn’t like. The men claimed that was proof enough that the announced election results were dishonest.

I, and several experienced analysts — a math PhD, a computer scientist, and an election auditor who had spent years studying election systems, voting data, and procedures — tried to explain why the statistics, alone, did not prove anything. We politely told him what records to obtain, why they mattered, what methodologies to use. Beadles didn’t care and soon lashed out.

Keep ReadingShow less
D.C. Police Officer Daniel Hodges shakes hands with Rep. Liz Cheney at a hearing

Officer Daniel Hodges of the D.C. police force shakes hands with then-Rep. Liz Cheney at a July 21, 2022, House committee hearing investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Remembering Jan. 6 with an officer injured in the line of duty

To mark the third anniversary of the attacks on the Capitol, the hosts of the “Politics Is Everything” podcast talked with D.C. Metropolitan Police Officer Daniel Hodges, who was beaten by rioters that day.

Keep ReadingShow less
Election challengers in Detroit in 2020

Election challengers demand to observe the counting of absentee ballots in Detroirt in 2020. The room had reached capacity.

Salwan Georges/The Washington Post via Getty Images

It's 2024 and the battle for democracy in the U.S. continues

Merloe provides strategic advice on democracy and elections to U.S. and international organizations. He is a former director of election integrity programs at the nonpartisan National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.

The U.S. political environment is suffering from toxic polarization, with election deniers constantly spewing noxious vapors to negate belief in the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election, the integrity of election administration, and the honorableness of their political opponents. The constant pollution has blinded many from seeing the real state of things and is causing others to close their eyes to avoid the irritation. The resulting diminished public confidence and perhaps participation in elections creates more precarious conditions in 2024 than it faced in 2020 and 2022.

I’ve learned an important lesson from observing elections in more than 50 countries: Even when elections are credible, if a large segment of the population is made to believe otherwise their outcome and the fate of democracy can easily be placed in jeopardy. Unfortunately, that is a central feature of the present electoral circumstance, and concerted action is needed to mitigate that damage and prevent it from worsening.

Keep ReadingShow less
Americans wrapped in a flag

"We must reaffirm the principles under which our country will function," writes Goodrich.

SeventyFour/Getty Images

Together, we can save our democracy

Goodrich is the president and CEO of The Center for Organizational Excellence.

Our democracy is being challenged and, if lost, will impact our way of life in more ways than most may realize. I have given a lot of thought as to why our country’s political environment is in such chaos, facing significant turmoil that challenges our present and our future.

It is important to note that I am truly politically independent. I do not carry the water of any political party and always attempt to consider what is in the best interest of our country. I can have both conservative and liberal tendencies, depending on the issue being addressed, and believe at times each party goes to unhelpful extremes. Occasionally they get it right, but perhaps it’s time to rethink our two-party model.

The foundation of our democracy is the Constitution. I believe it is an imperfect document but provides a strong foundation for the democracy it established. I am in awe that the Founding Fathers thought so much through that it is still applicable today. Every American should read it, and there are “plain language” versions online if it helps. While still strong, it perhaps needs some updating, expanded explanation and more precise language.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less