In defense of the "undemocratic" Senate

History aside, the “undemocratic” nature of the Senate is a central feature of a constitution designed to respect popular sovereignty while constraining the hazard of majority tyranny—hazards we now witness with dramatic policy shifts as control of government swings from one party to the other. At few times in U.S. history has the wisdom of the Great Compromise been more evident. Gridlock and shifting party control in the Senate might be dismissed as a product of undemocratic representation, but the House is also narrowly divided and likely to shift to a modest Republican majority in 2022. Yet both parties claim that the narrowest electoral victories mandate uncompromising implementation of highly partisan agendas.

Although the Framers aspired to a virtuous citizenry in which humility would accompany electoral victory, they understood that majorities would have little regard for the losers. Along with federalism, separation of powers, judicial review and soon thereafter the Bill of Rights, a bicameral legislature in which both the states and the people are represented was designed to be a safeguard against the hazards of simple majority rule.