Legislature by Lot: Envisioning Sortition within a Bicameral System*

• DOI: 10.1177/0032329218789886
• Published date: 01 September 2018
• Date: 01 September 2018
• Subject Matter: Special Issue Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329218789886

Politics & Society

2018, Vol. 46(3) 303 –330

© The Author(s) 2018

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0032329218789886

journals.sagepub.com/home/pas

Special Issue Article

Legislature by Lot: Envisioning

Sortition within a Bicameral

System*

John Gastil

Pennsylvania State University

Erik Olin Wright

University of Wisconsin–Madison

Abstract

In this article, we review the intrinsic democratic flaws in electoral representation,

lay out a set of principles that should guide the construction of a sortition

chamber, and argue for the virtue of a bicameral system that combines sortition

and elections. We show how sortition could prove inclusive, give citizens greater

control of the political agenda, and make their participation more deliberative and

influential. We consider various design challenges, such as the sampling method,

legislative training, and deliberative procedures. We explain why pairing sortition

with an elected chamber could enhance its virtues while dampening its potential

vices. In our conclusion, we identify ideal settings for experimenting with sortition.

Keywords

bicameral legislatures, deliberation, democratic theory, elections, minipublics,

participation, political equality, sortition

Corresponding Author:

John Gastil, Department of Communication Arts & Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, 232 Sparks

Bldg., University Park, PA 16802, USA.

Email: jgastil@psu.edu

*This special issue of Politics & Society titled “Legislature by Lot: Transformative Designs for Deliberative

Governance” features a preface, an introductory anchor essay and postscript, and six articles that

were presented as part of a workshop held at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, September 2017,

organized by John Gastil and Erik Olin Wright.

789886PASXXX10.1177/0032329218789886Politics & SocietyGastil and Wright

research-article2018

304 Politics & Society 46(3)

Democracy embodies a tension between utopian aspirations and practical realities.

The utopian ideal holds that ordinary people should be empowered to govern them-

selves. Democracy means rule by the people, not by elites, and if this were fully real-

ized, the people would themselves actually rule. In practice, even the most robust and

vibrant democracies delegate most rulemaking to professional politicians, who are

elected by the people, or to bureaucratic officials employed by the state. Ordinary citi-

zens may choose their rulers and hold them accountable, but the people do not them-

selves rule.

In the United States and most other mature democracies in recent decades, many

people believe this gap between ideals and reality has been widening. In the worst

cases, elections become a symbolic sideshow hiding the real exercise of power by

elites operating behind the scenes. Even in the best democracies, the gap remains.

There has never been a “Golden Age” in any actual democracy that approximated

democratic ideals.

Can this gap be narrowed? Is it possible to realize democratic ideals more fully

even under the constraints of large and complex contemporary societies? One strategy

is to try perfecting the mechanisms by which political elites are elected and held

accountable by ordinary citizens. There are many good proposals to accomplish this,

such as insulating electoral campaigns from the influence of private wealth,1 changing

the rules of the game for electoral representation,2 or enhancing the ability of citizens

to deliberate meaningfully on policies and candidates.3

These kinds of reforms, if implemented in a serious manner, would certainly

improve the democratic quality of elections, but they would still leave intact the fun-

damental feature of electoral democracy in which ordinary citizens are ruled by politi-

cal elites. The question, then, is whether there are ways other than improving electoral

mechanisms for reducing the gap between democratic ideals and realities. Are there

alternative foundations for democratic institutions that might better realize democratic

ideals?

We propose a different kind of strategy for deepening democracy. Before going into

the details, we can summarize our idea as having four basic elements.

1. The legislature would have two chambers, one consisting of elected represen-

tatives and the other a “sortition assembly” of randomly selected citizens.

2. The two chambers would have equal powers, each being able to initiate legisla-

tion and vote on legislation passed by the other chamber.

3. The members of the sortition chamber would be well compensated to make

participation attractive to those randomly selected for service.

4. Sortition appointments would be for a number of years, with a new cohort

selected each year as the most senior cohort finishes its term. Those selected

would receive extensive training and professional support staff.

The idea of choosing representatives by lot harkens back to the method the ancient

Greeks used to choose legislators, jurors, and municipal officers. Athenians believed

that this method could retain power in the hands of the public.4 In the modern world,