Checks and Balances as Democracy

Abstract This chapter defends the importance of political equality and of electoral democracy based on one person one vote and majority rule as mechanisms to realize it. The author critiques alternatives such as epistocracy, lottocracy, and consensus, arguing they undermine political agency, accountability, and efficiency. However, for electoral democracy to fully realize political equality requires a system of complex majoritarianism that overcomes two instances of the ‘proportionality problem’. First, all those with an equal vote must have an equal stake in the overall package of collective decisions; and second, the votes available to party representatives in the legislature must be broadly proportionate to the votes cast for them in elections. To respond to both problems requires devolved powers for local government, on the one hand, and a system of proportionate representation for elections, on the other. While legal constitutionalists advocate judicial oversight to prevent majority oppression of minorities, the chapter claims these democratic mechanisms create checks and balances that can serve this function more effectively and legitimately.