Thanks again eaphilosophy for your reply. I will post my write-up to the Less Wrong Forum. I just have one more question for now, are there any organizations out there who are looking for ideas such as this?

My paragraph beginning with "in regards to" is a possible solution to your first question "how would people who do not practice motivated reasoning be found and identified?"

My next statement "perhaps the ledger system I mentioned could be a blockchain system?" is a possible solution to your next question "Is there a more objective way of determining whether motivated reasoning is behind a decision, to counteract the possibility that the "nonpartisan" people may not actually be as unaffected by motivated reasoning as we would hope?" ( I was referring to the ledger system mentioned in the final paragraph of my Checks and Balances writeup. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are blockchains supposed to be unbiased? (https://dailyfintech.com/2018/06/04/blockchain-gives-hope-for-unbiased-news/) ).

You mentioned that I should try the Less Wrong Forum, should I post my whole Checks and Balances writeup there as well, or only ask them about the Harvard Implicit Bias test for motivated reasoning?

Thanks for your feedback eaphilosophy. You have brought up some good questions, and I am not entirely sure how to go about fixing these issues, but could the following be possible solutions to these issues:

In regards to how it can be implemented, is there perhaps some sort of screening process/background check that can be carried out to identify individuals who do not practice motivated reasoning?

Also, perhaps the ledger system I mentioned could be a blockchain system?

Besides governments and corporations, what other decision-making institutions could possibly benefit from this approach?