In the U.S. Constitution, the three-fifths compromise is part of Article 1, paragraph 2, paragraph 2, Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment (1868), which replaced that clause and expressly repealed the compromise. The extent of this constitutional illiteracy is not limited to the political left. Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in her speeches, “In the original U.S. Constitution, I was only three-fifths of a person.” 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.) The three-fifths rate was the result of a change in the statutes of 18 April 1783. :112 Change should have changed the basis for determining the wealth of each state and thus its tax obligations from real estate to the population as a measure of the ability to produce wealth. The proposal of a congressional committee had proposed that taxes be “provided by the various colonies in relation to the number of inhabitants of all ages, genders and of any quality, except indiem. :51 The South immediately opposed this formula, as it would include in the calculation of the amount of taxes payable by slaves, considered primarily as property.
As Thomas Jefferson wrote in his notes on debates, the southern states would be “subjunctive according to their number and wealth, while the North would be taxed only on numbers.” :51-52 David Gans is Director of the Human Rights, Civil Rights and Citizenship Program at the Constitutional Accountability Center, a think tank and law firm. The Express News published a column of him on last year`s constitutional requirements (“Count All Persons, as required by the Constitution, March 10) in which he stated that “someone who has been enslaved would be counted as three-fifths of a person” in order to determine representation in Congress. 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.