A Modest Proposal for Election Reform

In his work “A Modest Proposal,” Jonathan Swift humorously suggested that Ireland could solve its problems by consuming its children. In a similarly tongue-in-cheek manner, I propose that the United States need to reconsider its approach to elections to tackle some of its most pressing issues.

As someone who values results, I believe it’s time to move away from an excessive focus on process, particularly when those processes yield terrible outcomes.

The governance process in the U.S. has been in place for a long time, and while elections are generally fair, the results produced by elected officials often lead to disheartening laws and policies.

So, how’s that been going? If your answer isn’t “awful,” you might want to reassess your awareness or let your allegiance cloud your judgment.

To be frank, if you’re being honest with yourself, it’s hard to deny that the U.S. systems seem broken.

The primary issue? Our governments—federal, state, and local—are overwhelmingly large, more than they need to be.

And here’s a twist: Big Business virtually runs all of them. Each level of government feels more like a puppet engaged in a corrupt play. Yet, we’ve participated in electing these figures.

Think state and local governments are innocent? Look at the surveillance systems and data center expansions that are being imposed on us everywhere.

Now, let’s take a look at the latest federal lobbying statistics from Q2 2026, released recently by Politico Influence.

The figures are, unsurprisingly, staggering. The top 20 lobbying firms garnered $252.4 million just for that quarter. That’s a quarter of a billion dollars, all from direct lobbying by merely the top firms.

And remember, there are countless other lobbying entities beyond this top 20, not to mention a myriad of other influencing organizations—political consultants, policy advisors, pollsters, and so forth—all profiting. Meanwhile, D.C. capitalizes on us to fund these operations.

“If voting made any difference, they wouldn’t let us do it.” — Mark Twain

Keep Twain’s wisdom in mind when you hear discussions about crucial upcoming elections or bills like the SAVE Act or even the re-election of long-serving politicians.

As one character in the movie “Meatballs” puts it:

“It just doesn’t matter…It just doesn’t matter…It just doesn’t matter if we win or we lose.”

We vote for one political party, then switch to the other, and nothing changes. If anything, things seem to worsen.

So, what’s the solution?

A classic film, “WarGames,” provides sage advice: “Strange game. The only winning move is not to play.”

We hold elections, yet the results remain dismal.

Patient: “Doctor, it hurts when I do this.”

Doctor: “Don’t do that.”

Instead of elections, why not fill government positions like we do juries? Names could be randomly drawn from a hat.

In line with the Sixth Amendment, a vetting process could be employed to filter out any unsuitable candidates.

“I would rather be governed by the first 2000 people in the Manhattan phone book than the entire faculty of Harvard.” — William F. Buckley

This process, which I’ll dub Civic Duty, would be a one-time term of service. Just regular citizens stepping in briefly to serve the community before returning to their lives. Imagine a ruling class that dislikes ruling.

Consider how many idiotic policies could vanish and the positive changes that could happen.

Over 99% of the self-serving politicians currently entrenched could be replaced. It’s hard to imagine how much lobbying influence Big Business could have over regular citizens like plumbers and farmers, who might be disgusted by the state of affairs.

In 2024 alone, roughly $15.9 billion was spent on federal elections, with additional billions on state and local levels. All that money could essentially evaporate.

Picture a government made up entirely of everyday people striving to do good for the populace, detached from financial backers.

I can hear the objections: I’ve effectively disenfranchised the public and eliminated the electoral process and its poor results.

However, let’s be honest:

The Founding Fathers envisioned a government run by ordinary people who would dedicate a short time to serve before returning to their lives. This concept has been lost for many years.

At all government levels, we’ve strayed from this ideal. Civic Duty could bring it back.

The Founders were cautious regarding political parties, aware that such divisions would emerge. Now, we’re stuck in a two-party system, and Civic Duty could change that.

Moreover, they were concerned about how easily freedom could be corrupted and squandered.

“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” — Ben Franklin

Does anyone doubt that the Founders’ fears have been realized many times over?

Today, we have politicians from both parties working against the interests of ordinary citizens.

They’ve created extensive governments that prioritize their corporate benefactors over the needs of the people, all with our votes allowing this degradation.

It’s time to eliminate the people responsible for this destruction.

By removing the elections that enabled their rise.

This is my humble suggestion.