|
|
|
|
|
|
by quesera
1489 days ago
|
|
|
> while establishing slaves as 3/5 of a person for Congressional representation No argument against your point, but a similar[0] Constitutional issue persists today: Residents of Wyoming are established as 3.23 people for Congressional representation. Residents of California are about 4/5ths of a person. [0] Nothing is similar to slavery, and specifically here the fact that the voting power of these 3/5ths allocations was given to people who did not represent the interests of the humans that comprised the allocations in the first place! |
|
|
> No argument against your point, but a similar Constitutional issue persists today:
Yes, a very similar issue does exist, but the one you are pointing to is not similar.
> Residents of Wyoming are established as 3.23 people for Congressional representation.
The unequal weighting of population for representation in (in descending order of distortion) the Senate, Electoral College, and House as a whole is not really similar to the awarding of extra weight to those who are permitted by the State to vote specifically for people denied liberty as was done in the 3/5 compromise.
The fact that those disenfranchised by felony disqualification are counted—and as whole persons, not 3/5—especially given the way targeted criminalization and penal servitude directly replaced chattel slavery, is, OTOH, a very similar issue.