The Equal Protection argument against “winner take all” in the Electoral College

Contrary to the argument presented in Points 9–10, the second of the following two statements does not of necessity follow from the first:

it would seem reasonable that a majority of the people of a State could elect a majority of that State’s legislators’

it would seem reasonable that a minority of the people of a State could elect a minority of that State’s Electors

The first statement is perfectly compatible with either a winner-takes-all system (where a 60% majority of the people could elect a 100% majority of legislators) or proportional selection (a 60% majority of people elect a 60% majority of Electors). The second statement makes the stronger claim that a ‘reasonable’ outcome can only be achieved under the latter, a logical leap which is smuggled in without apparent justification.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.