Proportional representation (PR) corrects this. Instead of electing one winner per district under first-past-the-post (FPTP), PR allocates seats in proportion to votes received. A party winning 30% of the vote gets 30% of the seats—ensuring legislatures actually reflect the electorate.

This system already works in democracies worldwide, including Germany, New Zealand, and Sweden. Germany’s Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP) system balances local representation with proportional fairness, preventing one-party monopolies while ensuring regional accountability. New Zealand adopted MMP in 1996 after voters tired of unrepresentative parliaments. The result? Greater political diversity, higher voter satisfaction, and an end to single-party rule by default. Sweden’s open-list PR system allows voters to influence which candidates win seats, disrupting rigid party control.

PR also eliminates gerrymandering. Since seats are awarded by vote share rather than rigged district lines, politicians can no longer secure re-election by manipulating maps. It also allows more than two parties to thrive, breaking the Democratic-Republican duopoly, where voters must choose the lesser evil rather than true representation. The Netherlands, with pure PR, elects more than ten parties to parliament, ensuring dynamic governance.

PR also increases representation for women and minorities. Countries using PR elect far more diverse candidates than FPTP nations. Rwanda, which uses PR, leads the world with over 60% of parliamentary seats held by women. Finland, Norway, and Sweden—also PR countries—consistently top global rankings for gender equality in governance. The reason is simple: PR forces parties to appeal broadly, making diverse candidate lists a necessity rather than an afterthought. Meanwhile, the U.S. lags far behind, with entrenched barriers keeping power in the hands of the same narrow demographic. PR doesn’t just make elections fairer—it makes governments reflective of the societies they claim to serve.

Critics argue PR breeds chaos, but reality disagrees. Studies show PR nations achieve more stable governance because coalition governments must negotiate, tempering extremism and encouraging long-term policymaking. Switzerland’s PR-based Federal Council shares executive power across parties, fostering stability and progressive policy without the whiplash of winner-take-all swings. Germany, under PR, has built decades of stable governance, delivering balanced budgets, environmental protections, and strong social safety nets—things the U.S., with its perpetual policy lurching, can’t.

Another advantage of PR is its ability to defuse polarization. FPTP rewards extremism because candidates only need a plurality, not a majority, to win. This fuels division, as parties cater to their most radical factions. PR, by contrast, forces cooperation. Coalition-building is the norm in Germany and the Netherlands, ensuring no single ideology dominates unchecked. Meanwhile, the U.S. lurches between radical shifts every four years, creating instability and preventing long-term planning.

PR strengthens regional and ideological representation, giving voice to political movements silenced by FPTP. Under PR, smaller parties representing regional or ideological concerns can win seats, ensuring governance includes a wider range of perspectives. Canada’s continued use of FPTP, despite overwhelming support for electoral reform, shows the dangers of inaction—parties routinely win absolute power with as little as 39% of the vote. Scotland, by contrast, uses PR and enjoys a fairer distribution of power, ensuring entire regions are not politically neglected. Under PR, no vote is wasted, and political diversity thrives.

One way to achieve proportionality while preserving voter choice is through the Single Transferable Vote (STV). Unlike party-list PR, which can increase party control, STV allows voters to rank candidates individually, rather than just picking a party. This prevents centralized party machines from dictating outcomes and ensures representation reflects both voter preference and proportional fairness. STV works successfully in Ireland and parts of Australia, proving proportional systems can maintain voter agency.

PR also increases voter participation. People are more likely to vote when they know their ballot contributes to representation rather than being discarded in a rigged district. It diversifies government, giving smaller parties, independents, and marginalized voices a real chance to win. Instead of a binary contest, PR fosters negotiation, compromise, and policymaking that reflects the electorate’s actual complexity.

By adopting proportional representation, the U.S.and the U.K. would move beyond archaic structures that entrench minority rule and into a future where governance is transparent and representative.

Therefore, under Folklaw:

The first-past-the-post system shall be abolished in favor of proportional representation using the Single Transferable Vote. Multi-member districts shall replace single-member districts, ensuring seats are awarded in proportion to votes received. This will eliminate gerrymandering and wasted votes.

Electoral districts shall be drawn by independent commissions to prevent political manipulation. The system shall be restructured to support multiparty democracy, breaking the two-party stranglehold. Voters will no longer be forced into a false choice between two inadequate options but will instead see their political views accurately represented in government.