You may have seen this headline floating around on Twitter.
Campus Reform reports:
Ivy League Prof: Bad people get elected, so let’s choose our leaders by lottery insteadAn Ivy League professor said in an Aug. 21 op-ed that the United States should do away with elections and switch to a lottery system.Adam Grant, a Professor of both Management and Psychology at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, opined that elections favor people with “dark triad” personality traits and social privilege. He claimed a lottery system would select better leaders, and fix other concerns like election integrity.The piece was originally entitled “Elections are Bad for Democracy.”However, the title of the article changed 12 hours after it was published, to “The Worst People Run for Office. It’s Time for a Better Way.””On the eve of the first debate of the 2024 presidential race, trust in government is rivaling historic lows,” Grant began. “Officials have been working hard to safeguard elections and assure citizens of their integrity. But if we want public office to have integrity, we might be better off eliminating elections altogether.”Professor Grant then proposed a lottery pool as the alternative selection method. Grant compared the potential lottery election to both ancient Athenian democracy and the NBA draft.The professor declared that dispatching elections would have several advantages. It would help get rid of privilege in politics; it would give a fair shot to those “not tall enough or male enough to win”; it would also “open the door to people who aren’t connected or wealthy enough to run.”Furthermore, the lottery system, or sortition, would increase confidence in elections. “[N]o voting also means no boundaries to gerrymander and no Electoral College to dispute,” he said. Instead of debating the accuracy of vote counts, the public could just watch their potential leader get chosen live through the lottery pool.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY