I have a modest proposal that should lead to a more peaceful world and a less violent, more educated, better-led country: Ban men from the voting booth.

Here's my reasoning.

From the founding of the United States until 1920, the voting rights guaranteed by the Constitution applied only to men. How did that go? Even with the country's tremendous economic growth and geographic expansion, it's hard to overlook four score and seven years of slavery, a bloody civil war and shameful mistreatment of Native Americans and African Americans.

After the First World War, the 19th Amendment was passed, extending equality at the polling place to women. So where do we find ourselves after almost a century of mixed-gender voting? Saddled with a defective party system, a dysfunctional Congress and directionless foreign policy.

The electoral choices made by male voters and then by men and women together fall short when measured against Jefferson's promise of this country as "the world's best hope." My modest proposal, then, is to try the remaining formula: Have only women vote.

How does that make sense? Well, first of all, American women seem to make better decisions than those of us afflicted with a Y chromosome. You want an example? How about this: Women are incarcerated only 9% as often as men. That means women are either more law-abiding or smarter about not getting caught. Doesn't matter; I'd rather have only the female constituency voting in either case.

The same reasoning applies to alcoholism. Fewer than half as many women are diagnosed with alcoholism as men. Women are either less likely to become inebriated or better able to hold their liquor. Either would bestow on them the wherewithal to make better decisions.

One more thing: Colleges and universities grant 50% more bachelor's degrees to women than men. Women are just better educated. No surprise, then, that the female unemployment rate is lower.

So do smarts and sobriety and industry lead to better decisions? The answer appears to be in the affirmative. For a particularly topical example, nearly two-thirds of women favor banning assault weapons while only a minority of men do. In perhaps the worst foreign policy decision by the United States since the end of the Cold War, our troops invaded Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein from power. In a Gallup Poll five months before the invasion, women did not support an invasion; men did.

According to the Dec. 6-9, 2015, Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, men are almost 1.5 times more likely to view Donald Trump favorably than the opposite sex. That alone, some would argue, ought to disqualify American men from voting.

Should men still be able to hold office? Sure. If the newly modified, more intelligent electorate wants them in office, we can trust their judgment.

Let's face the facts. Women make superior choices. But — perhaps through remedial help and affirmative action — could men be taught to make better ones? No. Men have had more than two centuries to prove themselves responsible voters. Enough already. Ban them from the voting booth.

Time to write, call, email, tweet, text or fax our representatives and senators in support of a 28th Amendment that will promulgate true women's suffrage. Let's stand up for our best shot at an American electorate that makes good decisions.

Keith originally wrote this column, tongue firmly in cheek, for the San Jose Mercury News in 2016.

In Keith Raffel's checkered past, he has served as the senior counsel to the Senate Intelligence Committee, started an award-winning internet software company and written five novels, which you can check out at keithraffel.com. He currently spends the academic year as a resident scholar at Harvard. To find out more about Keith and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at creators.com.

Photo credit: ulleo at Pixabay