Usually, electoral laws in consolidated democratic systems have a two-folded and inconsistent nature.

• On one hand, they are involved within political and social debates, which causes some of their weaknesses to be more frequently addressed than their strengths. Frequently, such a situation encloses a contradiction that can be summed up by the following question: how come a proportional system can be criticized when a clear separation between voters and candidates has been promoted?
• The study of consolidated electoral systems draws a significant conclusion: electoral systems are supported by a very important degree of continuity. A kind of universal rule can be established as follows: electoral systems tend to consolidate their fundamentals; however, they can be modified when the political system is on crisis.

Such a situation is consistent with the permanent, technical, minor and procedural changes afflicting electoral laws. Among the reasons supporting the basic continuity of electoral systems, some can be mentioned as follows:

• First, no one is eager to change what is known for the unknown. Agents of any electoral system have certainty on the way in which such system works. Such a certainty does not prevent citizens or even political parties from having different opinions about the electoral system.
• Secondly, those who can modify electoral laws are the winners of the elections. Those who have been benefited from the current system are the ones who must promote any change.
• Besides, there are some historical facts that make any modification more and more difficult. Citizens usually show a kind of empathy towards their traditional electoral system, which is by the way and according to them, the closer representation of democracy. The older the electoral system is, the stronger the citizens’ empathy becomes. Tradition forces legislators to endorse traditional clauses, which may be seen as legislative relics somewhere else.
• Finally, there are many legal challenges derived from reforming electoral laws. The most important electoral rules are set down by the Constitution and vested, therefore, with such a special protection. Electoral laws can only be reformed by composed majorities. Such a fact obliges political parties to reach a clear and broad understanding on the subject.

Nonetheless, minor reforms to electoral laws are frequent. Electoral laws in both new democracies and consolidated democratic systems are constantly reformed, constantly adjusted.