Part I of this article noted that Americans have only a very small number—I counted a total of four—of citizenly duties; for that reason, our Republic can only function properly if we invest each of those duties with the highest possible degree of solemnity, sanctity, and seriousness. To speak metaphorically, only four pillars bear all the weight of the Roof of Citizenship, so we must carefully tend and maintain each of those pillars. It’s not enough merely to fulfill our duties, we need to do so in a citizenly way: that is, in a way that manifests our concern for the whole American community, and for the Constitutional structure that binds us together—not merely for our personal interests.

Before returning to the discussion of voting, how are we doing with regard to the other three duties?

Service in Elective and Appointive Office. The holders of public office have almost always suffered heavy criticism from Americans, often including outright scorn and mockery. That has usually had the salutary effect of limiting officials’ power, which is in accordance with the Founders’ design. Sometimes, however, that sentiment has veered into cynicism. Consider the fate of the word “politician.” In a democratic republic, a politician is simply a citizen who asks his fellows to trust him, for a limited time, with some authority over the people’s business. One who exercises that authority responsibly is doing a noble thing, a profound fulfillment of citizenly duty.

The cynicism comes, I believe, from the widespread sense that too many officeholders put their own interests above those of their constituents. Unfortunately, the people are too often correct in that suspicion. As government has grown, the more goodies it has available to hand out, and the more common it has been for officeholders to take a cut for themselves. That cut doesn’t have to go directly into an official’s pocket, it can get there indirectly: campaign contributions, sweetheart business deals, cushy jobs for spouses, or by cashing in as a lobbyist (or “consultant”) after leaving office.

Conservatism, with its call for reducing the size of government, should, in theory serve as an antidote to cynicism. On that issue, however, the Republican Party—which has been the only national party for conservatives since Grover Cleveland’s day—has simply failed: the last president actually to cut the federal budget was Calvin Coolidge. No fiscal restraint means no brake on cynicism. The TEA Party emerged as a reaction to that failure. The movement’s unapologetic radicalism included—not coincidentally—both a call for smaller government, and a renewal of the Founders’ ideal of public service. In 2014, a TEA Party-supported political novice, college professor David Brat, defeated the most powerful of incumbents, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, by campaigning as a citizen legislator against a self-serving “professional.” Victories of that kind are the best hope for both limiting government and combating cynicism.

Service on Juries. My impression is that Americans who actually end up serving on juries take their duties seriously. The problem is that too few citizens actually serve, both because jury duty is too easy to get out of, and because the selection process has devolved into a monstrosity—but that’s a subject for another article.

Service in the Armed Forces. Here we get to the best news of the day. After suffering terrible degradation in the Vietnam era, citizenly respect for the armed forces rebounded after 9/11, and has remained extremely high. That respect has returned both in its top-down aspect—virtually all public figures, in politics, media, business, or sports now eagerly and proudly proclaim that they “support the troops”—and in its bottom-up aspect: successful, highly educated citizens have put their civilian careers on hold in order to serve. The dramatic renewal of citizenly spirit regarding the armed forces suggests that renewal in other areas should be possible as well.

Voting. Now, what about elections? How to reclaim the citizenly quality of voting? The following proposal has little chance of near-term success, but it would be the right thing to do, it is Constitutional both in letter and spirit, and perhaps merely considering it will move citizens’ thinking in a positive direction.

The proposal begins by asking: how can Election Day reclaim the solemn and dignified spirit discussed in Part I? It would probably have to become a national holiday, wherein Americans set aside their private business for a few hours—say, between 8am and 6pm—and not only engage in their civic duty, but celebrate it. Next, consider the national calendar as it currently exists. General elections fall on “the first Tuesday following the first Monday in November.” That means Election Day happens between the 2^nd and the 8^th of the month. The latter date already puts the election only 3 days away from the next national holiday, Veterans Day. Finally, consider that Veterans Day is a holiday that has already proved it can withstand a change of name and purpose. It began in 1919 as Armistice Day, celebrating the end of World War I, and honoring the war dead; in 1954, Congress changed the name to Veterans Day, and declared that the holiday honors all who served, the living as well as the fallen.

I propose that we take that a step further. Congress should use its authority under Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution to combine Veterans Day with Election Day. But that’s not enough. We should also aggressively promote the exclusive character of the day. Veterans Day is already a paid holiday for government employees, and Congress could easily incentivize the vast number of businesses that contract with the federal government to make it a holiday for millions of private-sector workers, too. Congress should also give the states a financial incentive to drop the widespread use of mail-in voting, while supporting an expanded number of polling places—especially in locations, such as nursing homes, where significant numbers of people might otherwise not vote.

At present, most get-out-the-vote activities are conducted by the political parties and other partisan organizations. Those groups are tax-exempt, but contributions to them aren’t tax deductible. Congress could increase private support for voting assistance (such as providing transportation to polling places) by giving 501(c)(3) status to non-partisan charitable organizations willing to provide such services.

For decades now, we have tried to make voting easier, and all our efforts have failed to increase the percentage of people who vote. By making voting easier, and more individualistic, we have also stripped away much of its citizenly dignity and communal spirit. Time to try it another way. We should make voting “harder”—make people drag themselves to the polls, and everyone on the same day—and in the process, we will restore its meaning as a solemn community ritual. That will not only reduce the deep cynicism in our politics, but it will likely increase the number of citizens who exercise their sacred franchise.