改变投票制度，能减少选票浪费吗？｜美国选区划分之争 03/04

7 Sept 2026 · 2 min

Watch on YouTube

1:31

The video segment surveys academic proposals aimed at reducing wasted votes in elections. It notes that scholars disagree on the optimal system but share the goal of minimizing vote waste. It outlines two specific approaches: the Excess Method, a multi‑winner approval voting scheme by Brams, Brill, and George that reallocates surplus votes of winning candidates to other approved candidates; and Apportion Voting by Lloyd Koenig, which blends ranked‑choice and cumulative voting to create a proportional, multi‑vote system that can eliminate districts and thus make gerrymandering virtually impossible. The discussion frames these proposals as different constraint‑based solutions to the same problem of vote inefficiency.

Chapters

Meanwhile, papers that focus on implementing different electoral systems typically disagree on what would be the quote unquote best, but they typically argue that their system is the most efficient in that it wastes the least amount of votes cast. In the excess method, a multi-winner approval voting procedure to allocate waste votes by Stephen J. Brams, Marcus Brill and Anne-Marie George, they propose a type of approval voting that would minimize the amount of votes wasted by moving the excess votes of the winning candidate to other candidates that are also approved by their voters. In apportion voting by Lloyd Koenig, he designs an electoral system that is both proportional and allows people to cast multiple votes by combining aspects of ranked-choice voting, as seen in the first picture, and cumulative voting, as seen in the second. These both allow the elimination of districts, making gerrymandering hard to impossible. In essence, the literature is all trying to solve the same problem, but it's all just through a different set of constraints. Whether purely through current law or by radically changing how people vote and/or who they vote for.