What Agreement Was Reached With The Great Compromise Answers.com

The problem was referred to a commission made up of a delegate from each state in order to reach a compromise. On 5 July, the Committee presented its report, which became the basis for the “great compromise” of the Convention. The report recommended that each state have the same voice in the House of Lords, and in the House of Commons, each state should have one representative for every 40,000 inhabitants, [5] slaves should be counted as three-fifths of one inhabitant[5] and that the money bills should come from the House of Commons (not subject to a change by the upper chamber). Smaller states with fewer populations argued that such regulation would lead to unfair domination of large states in the government of the new nation, and that each state should be represented on an equal footing, regardless of the people. This means, for example, that although Wyoming has only three electoral college votes, with the smallest population of all states, each voter represents a much smaller group of people than each of the 55 votes in California`s most populous state. However, the issue of representation threatened to destroy the seven-week-old Convention. Delegates from the major states felt that because they contributed proportionately more to the country`s financial and defensive resources, their states should have proportional representation in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. Delegates from small states called, with comparable intensity, for all states to be represented in the same way in both houses. When Sherman proposed the compromise, Benjamin Franklin agreed that each state should have the same vote in the Senate on all matters except those related to money. When the Connecticut compromise was voted on on July 16, the Senate resembled the Congress of Confederations. In previous weeks of the debate, James Madison of Virginia, Rufus King of New York and Governor Morris of Pennsylvania strongly opposed the compromise for this reason.

[7] For the nationalists, the vote of the Convention in favour of compromise was a crushing defeat. But on July 23, they found a way to save their vision of an independent elite senate. Just before most of the Convention`s work was referred to the Committee for details, Governor Morris and Rufus King gave the opportunity to individually elect members of the Senate States instead of voting in bulk, as they had done in the Congress of Confederations. Then Oliver Ellsworth, a prominent proponent of the Connecticut compromise, supported his proposal and the Convention reached a lasting compromise. [8] Since the Convention early on approved the Virginia Plan`s proposal that senators have long terms, the restoration of the vision of this plan of individually powerful senators has prevented the Senate from becoming a strong protection of federalism. State governments have lost their direct control over congressional decisions to legislate at the national level. Since personally influential senators have been given much longer terms than the state legislators who elected them, they have become essentially independent. The compromise continued to serve the own interests of the political leaders of the small states, who were guaranteed access to more Senate seats than they would otherwise have been able to obtain. [9] The agreement reached under the Great Compromise of 1787 was that all states would be equally represented in the Senate and represented in proportion to the House of Representatives.

This system still occurs today, as each state is represented by two senators and the number of members of the House is elected by the population of the state. Until July 16, the Convention had already set the minimum age for senators at 30 and the term at six, compared to 25 years for members of the House of Representatives for a two-year term. James Madison explained that these distinctions, based on “the nature of the confidence of senators, which requires a greater degree of information and character stability,” would allow the Senate to continue “with more freshness, with more system and with more wisdom than the popular branch [ly] chosen.” This agreement allowed discussions to continue and resulted in the three-fifths compromise,