Following the trend of most democratic regimes around the globe, Brazil transitioned from an authoritarian governing system to a democratic system after rectifying the Brazilian Constitution of 1988. Currently, Brazil is considered to be a democratic republic with a bicameral legislative system of an upper house chamber and a lower house chamber, whose seats are filled based on federalist electoral rules. While these rules were created with the purpose of representative equality, the results have stirred controversy over Brazil’s electoral efficiency and effectiveness. Since Brazil’s democracy is fairly young, it is difficult to discern what the long-term effects of the electoral system will be. Some political scientists pose the question of what consequences an open-list proportional system would impose on the United States if they adopted a parallel election system. Yet, this hypothetical question means questioning one form of democracy over another, despite the fact that the term “democracy” has yet to obtain a firm definition, leads scholars to tip-toe around the subject. While one must walk on eggshells, it is a question worth asking and can provide interesting insights into future democratic possibilities. As previously stated, Brazilian legislature is comprised of an upper chamber, the Senate, or Senado, and a lower Chamber of Deputies, or Câmara dos Deputados. Formally, the Senate contains 81 seats, where three senators are chosen from each of the 27 federal states to ensure equal representation. In the Chamber of Deputies, 513 seats are chosen based on the open-list proportional representation, or open-list PR, the electoral system instituted within Brazilian politics. As stated by J. Tyler Dickovick and Jonathan Eastwood in Comparative Politics, “this system allows each voter to select a specific candidate and then attempts to achieve proportionality by aggregating the votes across parties,” (Dickovick/Eastwood, 209). In Brazil and European nations, open-list PR features the opportunity for political parties to gain house support from the various states while allowing citizens to actively seat candidates they believe will benefit their regional constituency. Furthermore, PR systems give political access to minority parties even if they do not receive a majority of the vote, meaning that to some extent everyone is being represented. Additionally, these weaker political parties can form coalitions with larger, more prominent parties to form coalitions that sway chamber voting. Coalitions aid smaller, weaker parties to combat social dominance theory as “the dominators in order to continue domination, and the disadvantaged group to try to change the status quo,” (Aguilar/Barone/Cunow/Desposa>