Headline for NY Times guest essay changed after originally claiming 'Elections are bad for democracy'

close

Video

Jonathan Turley: Trump-Georgia indictment creating 'slippery slope' for elections across America

Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley and attorney Philip Holloway offer their legal expertise in the Georgia election probe on 'Special Report.' 

Pieces published by both The New York Times and The Atlantic on Monday argued that America’s current election process is problematic and should be altered. 

The New York Times piece, a guest essay originally titled "Elections Are Bad for Democracy," by contributing opinion writer Adam Grant, went so far as to argue that American’s voting system should be replaced by a system of randomly choosing political leaders by lottery. 

The Times removed the original headline for the piece and replaced it with "The Worst People Run for Office. It's Time for a Better Way."

In The Atlantic article, titled "Americans vote too much," staff writer Jerusalem Demsas argued that there are too many elections in the United States and citizens can’t keep up with civic responsibility to vote in each one.

NY TIMES ESSAY ARGUES PROSECUTION OF TRUMP WILL HAVE 'TERRIBLE CONSEQUENCES' FOR AMERICA

Multiple articles from major liberal media outlets argued that Americas voting system needs to be altered. (GEORGE FREY/AFP via Getty Images)

The Times guest essay proposed getting rid of voting altogether. Grant wrote, "On the eve of the first debate of the 2024 presidential race, trust in government is rivaling historic lows. 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."

Arguing for random selection of candidates to replace democratic elections, he stated, "People expect leaders chosen at random to be less effective than those picked systematically. But in multiple experiments led by the psychologist Alexander Haslam, the opposite held true. Groups actually made smarter decisions when leaders were chosen at random than when they were elected by a group or chosen based on leadership skill."

Grant added, "A lottery would also improve our odds of avoiding the worst candidates in the first place. When it comes to character, our elected officials aren’t exactly crushing it."

He then concluded the piece, stating, "As we prepare for America to turn 250 years old, it may be time to rethink and renew our approach to choosing officials. The lifeblood of a democracy is the active participation of the people. There is nothing more democratic than offering each and every citizen an equal opportunity to lead."

Fox News Digital reached out to The New York Times for comment on the headline change but has yet to receive a response.

GOP PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE VIVEK RAMASWAMY TO ANNOUNCE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO RAISE VOTING AGE TO 25

A recent New York Times guest essay argued that America's voting process should be replaced with a lottery that randomly selects leaders. (Photo by JASON REDMOND/AFP via Getty Images)

In the Atlantic piece, Demsas worried, "In America, voters don’t do too little; the system demands too much. We have too many elections, for too many offices, on too many days. We have turned the role of citizen into a full-time, unpaid job. Disinterest is the predictable, even rational response."

From there the critiques of America’s elections flowed. The article stated, "Americans are asked to fill numerous and obscure executive, legislative, and judicial positions, and to decide arcane matters of policy, not just on the first Tuesday in November but throughout the year."

Demsas continued, "Americans are asked to vote too much, and Americans are asked to vote too often. One of the most pernicious ways politicians overburden voters is by holding off-cycle elections. Making time to vote is harder for some people than others; it’s harder for people with inflexible job schedules and needy dependents, for instance."

He added that Americans do get tired of all this voting, noting, "Americans rationally respond to such intense and random demands on our time by simply checking out."

The writer concluded the piece, "Giving power to the people is sometimes conflated with giving people more access to government decision making through, say, community meetings or ballot measures. But if only a small, unrepresentative group of people are willing to be full-time democrats, then that extra ballot measure, election, or public meeting isn’t more democracy; it’s less."

The Atlantic worried that Americans were voting too much. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP 

For more Culture, Media, Education, Opinion, and channel coverage, visit foxnews.1eye.us/media.