Serious question: How do you enforce the will of the majority at the same time as protecting the interests of the minority? It seems to me that this only really

Serious question: How do you enforce the will of the majority at the same time as protecting the interests of the minority? It seems to me that this only really allows the minority to set the agenda in most scenarios and the majority can only enforce their will in a "complete control" situation. EDIT: Why do states need representations in Congress at all? Aren't states arbitrary divisions anyway, as it relates to policy? Given that, why should we protect smaller states? I would like to know a/the rational basis for that, given that much policy is still left up to the state government so that they may govern their populace effectively as needed in their specific geographical region. Would it be better to protect them in the way of ensuring their ability to make their own laws as-needed isn't overridden by a proportionally-represented Congress? The requirement of equal representation of states (arbitrary) is causing unequal representation of people (what states are made of), which is what government is truly here for. Equal representation in Senate = whoever has the highest (or at least "most correct as it relates to our map") geographical distribution has the ability to control legislative outcomes. But geographical distribution does not mean majority, and that's where we're at today. This then causes unequal representation of the people in presidential elections via the electoral college and thus further entrenches the unequal representation of the people. I'd have to say that I disagree with the author's solution and that I really only see one choice, which is to merge (i.e. get rid of) the Senate with the House. The author's solution is merely the same thing by a different name. We should also abolish the electoral college, as this has the same effect as a Senate-type body on a democracy.