Electoral System Debate: State vs. Federal Solutions #shorts

11 Sept 2026 · 3 min

Watch on YouTube

2:43

In this short commentary, the speaker outlines the scholarly debate surrounding reforms to the United States' first‑past‑the‑post (FPTP) electoral system. Two overarching research strands are identified: (1) proposals to replace FPTP with alternative voting systems that aim to minimize wasted votes, and (2) proposals to tighten regulation of the existing single‑member‑district system, especially to curb partisan gerrymandering. Within the regulatory strand, scholars diverge on the appropriate jurisdiction for reform—federal versus state. The speaker cites Nicholas Stephanopoulos and Eric McGhee’s "Partisan Gerrymandering and the Efficiency Gap," which proposes a court‑usable legal test based on the efficiency‑gap metric to identify partisan gerrymanders. Conversely, Samuel L. P. Leroy’s "Mutually Assured Democracy" advocates for an interstate‑compact approach under the Compact Clause, allowing states to collectively neutralize gerrymandering incentives. The commentary notes that proponents of new electoral systems typically argue their designs are more efficient because they waste fewer votes, though there is no consensus on a single best alternative.

Chapters

What similarities and differences are there between some of these various topics studied? When we look at articles through a system perspective, we can find 2 broad categories. A number of studies advocate for switching to a different electoral system as opposed to first-past-the-post, while others look for a stricter set of regulations on the current electoral system, which has single-member districts and partisan redistricting. On papers that focus on potential regulations on our current electoral system, there are also divides on whether it should be settled more by the state level or on the federal level. An example of a work promoting federal change in this category is Partisan Gerrymandering and the Efficiency Gap by Nicholas Stephanopoulos and Eric McGee, which advocates for a legal test that courts can use to define partisan gerrymander— gerrymandering through the efficiency gap. This is a percentage which captures the amounts of wasted votes in a districting plan through the draftsmen packing and cracking opposition voters by representing the difference between various parties' wasted votes in an election, which is divided by the total number of votes after that. An example of a work that is a proponent of state-level change, however, is Mutually Assured Democracy: Cooperating Under the Compact Clause to Combat Partisan Gerrymandering by Samuel L. P. Leroy. In this paper, he advocates for mutual cooperation between states to collectively de-gerrymander the country through interstate compacts. As he argues that it would break the pressures that incentivize state governments to gerrymander to maximize party potential in their states. 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.