[EL] Congressional apportionment under the three-fifths clause

[Samuel S. Wang]

For a discussion of the first Census, see page 8 of this, forthcoming in the Harvard Law and Policy Review:
https://election.princeton.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/wang_canter_HLPR_preprint.pdf


>>>

Prof. Samuel S.-H. Wang

Neuroscience Institute, Washington Road

Princeton University

Princeton, NJ 08544

Office: (609) 258-0388

Virtual office: http://princeton.zoom.us/my/samwang



Neuroscience: synapse.princeton.edu

Elections: election.princeton.edu

Redistricting: gerrymander.princeton.edu



________________________________
From: Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> on behalf of sean at impactpolicymanagement.com <sean at impactpolicymanagement.com>
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2020 5:52 PM
To: 'Election Law Listserv' <law-election at uci.edu>
Subject: [EL] Congressional apportionment under the three-fifths clause


Does anybody know of any solid research or analysis that shows how many congressional seats were awarded to states in the 1791 – 1861 reapportionments as a result of the three-fifths clause (meaning, if slaves had not been counted at all for Congressional representation, how many House members would they have had?). I did some very rough estimates for the 1791 apportionment and it looked like a total of 12 seats were given (5 to Virginia,  2 to Maryland, 2 to North Carolina, 2 to South Carolina, 1 to Georgia) based on the three-fifths clause, but I didn’t know if anyone else had done similar calculations.



Sean Parnell
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20201002/10fed611/attachment.html>