3 ms·
His point is that the 3/5th compromise doesn't count people equally, like today where all votes aren't equal.
by timeal 10y ago
His point is that the 3/5th compromise doesn't count people equally, like today where all votes aren't equal.
- gozur88 10y agoIt didn't count them equally because they weren't allowed to vote. Let's say you had a state with one voter and 9,999,999 people who couldn't vote. Should that guy have the voting power of ten million people?
- timeal 10y agoThat guy shouldn't. But do you realize that this flaw exists in today's presidential election system? If in the entire state of California, only 1 voter casts his ballot and the millions of other don't vote or can't vote, then this single ballot would decide all 55 electoral votes of California.
- gozur88 10y agoThat's true. The difference is on a percentage basis the people who can't vote today are a tiny percentage of the population. In the antebellum South that wasn't the case.