The Founders believed that a populist government would create a tyranny against the minority. So they set-up a system in which each state's individual power was equally balanced against every other state in the upper house while the more populous states would have greater power in the lower house. Since people are the source of wealth, that is why spending bills originate in the lower house.

The election of the presidency is through a compromise of the 2 houses of government in which the electors are mostly selected by the population of each state, moderated by the 2 electors each state is apportioned regardless of population.

Currently, the 2 major parties have devised a "winner-takes-all" system within each state (with a couple of exceptions). For example, Florida has 25 electors -- one for each congressional district and 2 for the senators. In 2005 all of the electors went to Bush.

Why should that be the case? Why not have each elector from each congressional district vote according to his district and the 2 senatorial electors vote their conscience?

And so forth with most of the remainder of the states.

The reason is that the 2 major parties recognized that true proportional representation would allow 3rd parties into government. They would lose control. The 2 major parties are all about power. Control is a manifestation of power.

B