>My proposed reform, therefore, is that after an election, if those ratios are not as close as possible, the electoral officers would go down the list of seats that were lost by the under-represented party (from best performance to worst) and flip the result so that the under-represented party gains representation, until the ratio can't be improved any more.
This seems like an implementation that would harm the trust in the system. If you're going to bother having representation by geography in a democratic system, it should be based purely on geography, not based on demographics within the geography.
I agree with the author of the post that the geographic element itself is the source of the issue and that there are perhaps other better ways of dealing with the "tyranny of the majority" issue that the founding fathers intended to handle via republicanism.
This seems like an implementation that would harm the trust in the system. If you're going to bother having representation by geography in a democratic system, it should be based purely on geography, not based on demographics within the geography.
I agree with the author of the post that the geographic element itself is the source of the issue and that there are perhaps other better ways of dealing with the "tyranny of the majority" issue that the founding fathers intended to handle via republicanism.