In his review of Heather Gerken's book, The Democracy Index, Professor Michael Kang praises Gerken's novel approach to reforming election administration.  Gerken proposes creating a ranking system—the Democracy Index—that would list data about election-administration performance for each state. 

Kang favors this approach, noting that it represents a conceptual shift away from seeking reform through the neutral judgment of third parties (most often, courts), and instead towards seeking reform by realigning political incentives with voters' interests.  Kang notes that this shift is critical because experienced politicians are arguably the people who know the most about the election system, and currently, incumbent politicians have no reason to pursue reform since it was the status quo election system that ushered them into office to begin with.  By promoting accountability through a ranking system such as the Democracy Index, politicians are given new, compelling incentives to seek reform.