An Agreement To Count Slaves As Three-Fifths Of A Person Was Related To
After Benjamin Harrison of Virginia did not sufficiently support the compromises of one-half and three-quarters of several new countries, Congress finally opted for the three-fifths ratio proposed by James Madison. :53 But this amendment ultimately failed because two states did not unanimously approve the amendment of the articles of Confederation (only New Hampshire and New York opposed it). It is true that the idea of five-thirds does not correspond to the “one person, one voice” mantra of which the nation is proud. But the exact legal meaning of this sentence is not yet clear, which is why the Supreme Court will review it at Evenwel v. Abbott. In this case, it is the basis for determining the size of a district: should it be the total population or only the population of the electorate? Currently, a district with a significant number of ineligible voters (children, undocumented immigrants, temporary military personnel) counts these residents among its population, giving greater weight to voters. (Of course, constituencies with a small number of these ineligible voters do not appreciate the votes of their constituents who have fewer votes.) This plan should be limited in time, as it is not a question of permanently installing historical equivalence, but of removing structural handicaps. The weighted vote could be set at a predetermined period, say 24 years, which is only about one-third of the years in which the three-fifths compromise existed. This period would include several presidential elections, Congress, national and local elections, as well as referendums. Any elected position, regardless of its mandate, would face several elections, giving its constituencies successive opportunities to hold their representatives to account. If you want to stop a conversation about race, just say the word “repairs.” Even black Americans disagree that money can compensate for the remnants of an evil institution that ended 150 years ago; Only 60% believe that the government should pay in cash to the descendants of slaves. In contrast, white Americans reached a consensus: in a YouGov poll conducted shortly after the release of the Atlantic viral feature “The Case for Reparations,” 94% were against it.