Eleanor Finch
The US Constitution, ratified by all 13 states in 1789, is often referred to as a bundle of compromises due to the many concessions made by delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787. The delegates had to navigate diverse interests and viewpoints, and while not everyone was satisfied with the outcome, the Constitution has served as the foundation of the US federal government for over two centuries. Some of the key compromises included the Great Compromise, which addressed representation in the federal government; the Three-Fifths Compromise, which pertained to the representation of enslaved people in southern states; and the Electoral College Compromise, which determined how the president would be elected.
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
- The Great Compromise: settled matters of representation in the federal government
- The Three-Fifths Compromise: settled matters of representation for the enslaved population
- The Electoral College Compromise: determined how the president would be elected
- The Commerce Compromise: outlined how the federal government should regulate business
- The Connecticut Compromise: a two-house legislature with equal representation for all states
The Great Compromise: settled matters of representation in the federal government
The United States Constitution was created through a series of compromises among the delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787. The Great Compromise, also known as the Connecticut Compromise, was one of the key compromises that helped form the U.S. Constitution. It settled matters of representation in the federal government, specifically in Congress, by creating a dual system of representation.
The delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787 were divided over the issue of representation in Congress. Delegates from large states believed that because their states contributed more to the nation's financial and defensive resources, they should have greater representation in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. On the other hand, small-state delegates demanded equal representation in both houses. The disagreement over representation threatened to derail the ratification of the Constitution, as delegates from both sides vowed to reject the document if their demands were not met.
The Great Compromise provided a solution to this dispute by combining elements of the Virginia Plan (proposed by large states) and the New Jersey Plan (proposed by small states). It established proportional representation in the House of Representatives, with each state assigned a number of seats based on its population. At the same time, it provided for equal representation in the Senate, with each state having the same number of seats regardless of its population. This compromise resolved one of the most controversial aspects of the drafting of the Constitution and helped to create a federal government that balanced the interests of large and small states.
The Great Compromise was a hard-fought agreement, passed by a single vote. It laid the foundation for today's system of congressional representation and continues to influence the distribution of power in the U.S. government. The compromise also extended to the Electoral College, which was created as a compromise to elect the president instead of direct popular vote. The number of electoral votes each state holds is based on its combined number of representatives in the House and Senate, giving smaller states a disproportionately bigger say in presidential elections.
Banding Together: WWII's Musical Unifiers
You may want to see also
The Three-Fifths Compromise: settled matters of representation for the enslaved population
The Three-Fifths Compromise was an agreement reached during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention over the inclusion of slaves in a state's total population. This agreement settled matters of representation for the enslaved population. The compromise counted three-fifths of each state's slave population toward that state's total population for the purpose of apportioning the House of Representatives. This gave Southern states more power in the House relative to the Northern states.
The delegates from the Northern states sought to make representation dependent on the size of a state's free population. Southern delegates, on the other hand, threatened to abandon the convention if enslaved individuals were not counted. Eventually, the framers agreed on a compromise that called for representation in the House of Representatives to be apportioned based on a state's free population plus three-fifths of its enslaved population. This agreement was known as the Three-Fifths Compromise.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a morally dubious agreement that reflected the established slavery system in the United States at the time. It was debated at length between July 9 and 13 and was initially voted down by the members present at the Convention. A few Southern delegates then proposed full representation for their slave population, which most states voted against. Recognizing that the states could not agree on a compromise, the ratio of three-fifths was proposed again and agreed upon by eight states to two.
The compromise also had implications for taxation and voting power in the Electoral College. It determined how much money states would pay in taxes, with three-fifths of the enslaved population being counted for determining direct taxation. Additionally, it influenced the voting power in the Electoral College, with enslaved persons being counted as three-fifths of a person for determining congressional representation.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was one of several compromises made during the Constitutional Convention to reconcile diverse interests and viewpoints. While some delegates opposed the inhumane practice of slavery, others sought to protect their existing property rights as slaveholders. The issue of slavery threatened to divide the Union, but the delegates ultimately agreed to postpone a decision on the importation and sale of enslaved individuals until 1808.
The American Constitution: Democratic or Not?
You may want to see also
The Electoral College Compromise: determined how the president would be elected
The United States Constitution was created through a series of compromises among the delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787. The Electoral College Compromise was one such agreement that determined how the president would be elected.
The Electoral College was established as a compromise between electing the president by a vote in Congress and a popular vote of qualified citizens. The delegates from the Southern states objected to a direct popular vote in presidential elections, which would have given them less electoral representation. This was because, at the time, the Southern states had large populations of non-voting enslaved people, who were counted as three-fifths of a person for the purposes of congressional representation.
The delegates from the Northern states, on the other hand, wanted to block the expansion of slavery and did not want to provide explicit protection for it in the Constitution. They were willing to compromise with the Southern delegates to form a new Union and create a stronger national government.
The Electoral College was thus created as a way to bridge the gap between these differing interests and perspectives. It consists of electors drawn from the states and the District of Columbia, with each state having a number of electors equal to its Congressional delegation. These electors are selected by popular vote, and they, in turn, vote for the president and vice president.
The Electoral College has been criticised for its racist origins and for diluting the political power of voters of colour. It has also resulted in instances where candidates have won the presidency despite losing the nationwide popular vote. However, it remains a part of the original design of the Constitution and would require a Constitutional amendment to change.
Liveness and Live Migration: Defining Virtual Machine Uptime
You may want to see also
Explore related products
![Founding Fathers [DVD]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71f9-HsS5nL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
The Commerce Compromise: outlined how the federal government should regulate business
The U.S. Constitution, produced after the Constitutional Convention of 1787, is sometimes referred to as a "bundle of compromises". This is because delegates had to agree on several key points to create a government charter that was acceptable to all 13 states. One of these key compromises was the Commerce Compromise, which outlined how the new federal government should regulate business.
The Commerce Compromise, also known as the Commerce Clause, gave Congress the authority to control domestic and international trade, but not the slave trade for at least 20 years. According to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, Congress has the power "to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the states, and with the Indian tribes". This clause has been interpreted broadly by the courts for much of U.S. history, with Congress often using it to justify exercising legislative power over the activities of states and their citizens.
The Commerce Compromise was controversial because some states were concerned that a central government with the power to regulate commerce might unfairly favour some states over others. On the other hand, other states recognised the need for a central authority to control commerce to avoid trade conflicts and ensure a well-functioning national economy. The Commerce Compromise was a win for the Southern states, as it mandated that all commerce legislation must be passed by a two-thirds majority in the Senate, countering the power of the more populous Northern states.
The Supreme Court has played a significant role in interpreting the Commerce Clause. Early Supreme Court cases primarily viewed the clause as limiting state power rather than as a source of federal power. In Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), the Supreme Court held that intrastate activity could be regulated under the Commerce Clause if it was part of a larger interstate commercial scheme. Later, in Swift and Company v. United States (1905), the Court ruled that Congress had the authority to regulate local commerce as long as it was part of a continuous "current" of commerce involving the interstate movement of goods and services.
In more recent times, the Supreme Court has attempted to curtail Congress's broad legislative mandate under the Commerce Clause by adopting a more conservative interpretation. In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Court held that Congress only has the power to regulate the channels of commerce, the instrumentalities of commerce, and actions that substantially affect interstate commerce. This decision marked a shift in the Court's interpretation of the Commerce Clause, seeking to balance the power of the federal government and the states in regulating commerce.
Exploring Boston: USS Constitution and North Station
You may want to see also
The Connecticut Compromise: a two-house legislature with equal representation for all states
The United States Constitution was created through a series of compromises among the delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787. One of the key compromises was the Connecticut Compromise, also known as the Great Compromise. This compromise addressed the issue of state representation in the legislature and proposed a two-house legislature with equal representation for all states.
During the creation of the Constitution, two plans emerged regarding state representation. The Virginia Plan proposed representation based on each state's population, while the New Jersey Plan favoured equal representation for every state. The Connecticut Compromise combined both plans by suggesting a bicameral legislature with two chambers: the upper house or Senate, and the lower house or House of Representatives.
The Senate, under the Connecticut Compromise, would provide equal representation for all states, regardless of their population. Each state would have two senators, ensuring that the interests of smaller states were protected. On the other hand, the House of Representatives would have a varying number of representatives from each state, proportional to their population. This chamber would give more weight to the larger states and their populations.
The Connecticut Compromise aimed to balance state sovereignty and popular sovereignty tied to actual population size. While it reflected a victory for small states, it also created a mixed solution that accommodated the interests of both small and large states. This compromise was essential in forging a unified government that all states could agree on, demonstrating the importance of negotiation and concession in the democratic process.
The Connecticut Compromise, along with other compromises on issues such as slavery, commerce, and the Electoral College, played a pivotal role in shaping the U.S. Constitution. These compromises allowed for the ratification of the Constitution by all 13 states, establishing a foundation for the United States federal government that has endured for over two centuries.
GDPR: What's Not Personal Data?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Great Compromise, also known as the Connecticut Compromise, settled matters of representation in the federal government. It combined the Virginia Plan, which provided representation based on each state's population, and the Jersey Plan, which proposed equal representation for every state.
The Three-Fifths Compromise settled matters of representation when it came to the enslaved population of Southern states and the importation of enslaved Africans. Enslaved people were counted as three-fifths of a person for purposes of congressional representation and, in turn, for determining voting power in the Electoral College.
The Electoral College Compromise resolved the issue of how the president would be elected. It was decided that the Electoral College, a body of representatives from every state, would be used to choose the president instead of the general public.
