Virginia Presidents and Slaves among other things , the EC

[peach174]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

If you think we have the EC because of slavery we clearly have an education problem.

I don't know where you people come up with this shit.

From college professors, far left opinion news, magazines and Hollywood, just to mention a few.

History, read the above and follow the links. This is the way it was.

The south wanted the slaves to count, even thought they could not vote, so the compromise was:

Long Answer: 3/5 Compromise = 3/5 of the slave population would be counted for BOTH population and taxation purposes. (Example: If Georgia had 1000 slaves total in their state (3/5*1000) would be counted or 600 slaves towards Georgia's population and taxes.

American History Flashcards | Quizlet

So it increased Georgia representation in the congress.

It decreased it by 400.
If the whole 1 ,000 would have been counted it gave Georgia ,as all the Southern States more power in congress towards population and taxes.

 

[TheParser]

Maybe we should all remember that the United States of America was NOT intended to be a democracy.

That is, decisions were not to be made by the masses.

Thus, the Electoral College -- as has been stressed many times in this thread -- prevents an unrepresentative majority to ride roughshod over everyone else.

*****

If we really want to be a democracy, then we should seriously think about a parliamentary system based on proportional representation.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

If you think we have the EC because of slavery we clearly have an education problem.

I don't know where you people come up with this shit.

It seems to be some relatively new form of left wrong-wing anti-constitutional nonsense—to try to discredit parts of the Constitution by falsely claiming them to be rooted in slavery or racism. I've seen similar arguments made against the Second Amendment.

 

[paperview]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

If you think we have the EC because of slavery we clearly have an education problem.

I don't know where you people come up with this shit.

From college professors, far left opinion news, magazines and Hollywood, just to mention a few.

History, read the above and follow the links. This is the way it was.

The south wanted the slaves to count, even thought they could not vote, so the compromise was:

Long Answer: 3/5 Compromise = 3/5 of the slave population would be counted for BOTH population and taxation purposes. (Example: If Georgia had 1000 slaves total in their state (3/5*1000) would be counted or 600 slaves towards Georgia's population and taxes.

American History Flashcards | Quizlet

So it increased Georgia representation in the congress.

It decreased it by 400.
If the whole 1 ,000 would have been counted it gave Georgia ,as all the Southern States more power in congress towards population and taxes.

No. You are way off.

The Founders made a dirty compromise and kicked the can down the road.

The compromise was necessary, because the Southerners would not have become part of the Union if they could not have their slaves. That is a fact. Sad, but ...reality.

They gave the equivalent of horses and cows representation in Congress.

The 3/5th clause was about reapportionment.

The North did not want the slaves counted at all - because they were property.
In fact at the Constitutional Convention, some Northern reps even argued if property could be counted for reapportionment, why not their horses?

The south wanted full count to beef up their numbers in Congress, which it did -- they just didn't want those same people -- er, property, to vote or to actually have representation.

That would kinda jam up their plans.

That dirty compromise gave the south overwhelming domination in Congress for most of the country's history until the CW.

The country paid for it in much blood generations later...

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Read the OP, it was because of lack of transportation, education and communication. Today we do not have those issues unless as we know most Republicans are not educated. correctly.

Judging by most of you what you post here we clearly still have education and communication problems.

 

[peach174]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

If you think we have the EC because of slavery we clearly have an education problem.

I don't know where you people come up with this shit.

From college professors, far left opinion news, magazines and Hollywood, just to mention a few.

History, read the above and follow the links. This is the way it was.

The south wanted the slaves to count, even thought they could not vote, so the compromise was:

Long Answer: 3/5 Compromise = 3/5 of the slave population would be counted for BOTH population and taxation purposes. (Example: If Georgia had 1000 slaves total in their state (3/5*1000) would be counted or 600 slaves towards Georgia's population and taxes.

American History Flashcards | Quizlet

So it increased Georgia representation in the congress.

It decreased it by 400.
If the whole 1 ,000 would have been counted it gave Georgia ,as all the Southern States more power in congress towards population and taxes.

No. You are way off.

The Founders made a dirty compromise and kicked the can down the road.

The compromise was necessary, because the Southerners would not have become part of the Union if they could not have their slaves. That is a fact. Sad, but ...reality.

They gave the equivalent of horses and cows representation in Congress.

The 3/5th clause was about reapportionment.

The North did not want the slaves counted at all - because they were property.
In fact at the Constitutional Convention, some Northern reps even argued if property could be counted for reapportionment, why not their horses?

The south wanted full count to beef up their numbers in Congress, which it did -- they just didn't want those same people -- er, property, to vote or to actually have representation.

That would kinda jam up their plans.

That dirty compromise gave the south overwhelming domination in Congress for most of the country's history until the CW.

The country paid for it in much blood generations later...

Only property owners could vote back then.