CARTOONS VoteHere
MAPTOONS |  Amend.15
 Voter-ID SWING COURT
[X] POLITICS CRS-REPORT.pdf Delegate Apportionment FREEDMAN'S BUREAU [X] Government
4 score {1787/1867/1876 }
 James Madison 39thCongress JohnsonVeto neo-Redemption
VIDEO

ABE-LINCOLN_BLACK VOTE

US-GRANT_BLACK VOTE

 NPV.pdf | NPV-Web Site.pdf
NPV hi-lights

RTV-ACT

Art.1§2&Art.2§1
vs.
Amend. XIV§2

2008 by Districts.pdf

NARA-OFR_2008
Election Pamphlet.pdf
RICHMOND ENQUIRER November 2, 1860 November 6, 1860 November 9, 1860
HARPERS WEEKLY June 10, 1865 August 5, 1865 December 9, 1865
HARPERS WEEKLY March 9, 1867 Apil 13th, 1867 September 28th, 1867
THE BLACK VOTE  Abraham Lincoln Ulysses S. Grant Reconstruction
[X] 2000   |  us2000-2004  | [X] ELECTORAL VOTES Un-BOUNDED STATES Unbounded 2008 v 2012
2008 ELECTORAL MAP_ B&W NATIONAL VOTE | B&WGap WHITES ONLY WHITE MALES ONLY

 

















 "Resolved, that the compact which exists between the North and the South is a covenant with death and an agreement with hell - involving both parties in atrocious criminality - and should be immediately annulled."
      This resolution was drafted by the aboli- tionist William Lloyd Garrison and passed by the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society. The compact to which it referred was the Consti- tution of the United States of America. The compact was declared an agreement with hell because-in its original form-it sanctioned slavery.










 
 
 
 
 
 










ARTICLE XV 
ARTICLE XIV§2

 
 
 
 
 

ARTICLE XV
  ARTICLE XIV§2

 
  




The Constitution A Pro-Slavery Compact; or Selections from the Madison Papers, 2d ed. (1845) Wendell Phillips

James Madison:Virginia
James Madison was 27 years old when he helped write Virginia's Constitution
  [T]he states were divided into different interests not by their difference of size, by other circumstances; the most material of which resulted partly from climate, but principally from the effects of their having or not having slaves. These two causes concurred in forming the great division of interests in the United States. It did not lie between the large and small states: it lay between the Northern and Southern.
- May 30.

 











James Madison
Virginia
The Large State Plan
July 14: "It seemed now to be pretty well understood that the real difference of interests lay, not between the large and small but between Northern and Southern states. The institution of slavery and its consequences formed the line of discrimination.  "

Madison proposed that representation in one house of the legislature be based on total population and the other on only the free population.

 















"We have a security that the general government can never emancipate them, for no such authority is granted and it is admitted, on all hands, that the general government has no powers but what are expressly granted by the Constitution and that all rights not expressed were reserved by the several states."
Gen. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney

 















James Wilson
James Wilson
Pennsylvania
Executive Compromise
3/5ths & Electoral College
 "Can we forget for whom we are forming a government? Is it for men, or for the imaginary beings called States?"

James Wilson, author of U.S. Constitution. 30 June 1787.
Madison, James (1 April 1987). Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787. W.W. Norton & Company.
 











APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE - 1867
 39th Cong..2d Sess. / Reconstruction /Ho. of Reps.  p.61
Speech of Hon. A. H. Ward, of Kentucky, 
In the House of Representatives, January 19, 1867.

 The House having under consideration the bill (H.R. No.543) to provide for restoring to the states lately in insurrection their full political rights-
  Mr. WARD, of Kentucky said: ... The bill under consideration assumes that ten States, with a population of ten or twelve million white citizens, are out of the union, foreign States, and their people aliens. 

 p.62 (January 19, 1867)
... what do you get under the suffrage regulations of this bill?   You get the votes of the Negroes, the votes of men who have learned the science of self-government in the school of slavery for nearly two hundred years. ... 

There is a provision in this very bill which says that if the right of suffrage and any other rights be in any manner restricted or denied by any of these states to the negro then that State shall be excluded from its representation upon the floor of Congress.  Is it possible that such a precedent as that is to be established here? 

 p.64 [January 21, 1867]
  Mr. Trimble ... this bill proposes to disfranchise three fourths of all the white people of the South and degrade them to the position of slaves, denying them a voice in the affairs of their States or to be represented in the councils of the nation.  I say that this bill is a plain violation of that amendment of the Constitution, because under this bill all persons are disfranchised who come within the provisions which I will now read . It is as follows:

  Sec.6. And be it further enated, That all persons who on the 4th day of March, 1861, were of full age who held office, either civil or military, under the government called the "confederate States of America," or who swore allegiance to said government, are hereby declared to have forfeited their cittizenship and to have renouced allegiance to the United States, and shall not be entitled to exercise the elective franchise, or hold office, untill five years after they shall have filed their intention or desire to be reinvested with the right of citizenship, and shall swear allegiance to the United States and renouce allegiance to all other Governments or pretended governments.

  Who, I ask, can vote under this clause? Can any honest native of the South?  The object and purpose of this last constitutional amendment was to prevent the disfranchisement of the black race or to endow them with the right of suffrage.  But the object and purpose of this bill is to give the right of suffrage to the blacks and to disfranchise the whites ... why, I ask, do you come here now and seek by the provisions of this bill to disfranchise three fourths or four fifths of the white population of the South?  Is not that making a discrimination between races?  But I suppose that that is all right if the discrimination is against white men, in the estimation of the majority here.


 
 
 

{ note: In an irony of retribution for defining backs as 3/5ths of a man in the post revolution constitution to increase southern whites representation in government, a post civil war bill would now disfranchise an additional 1/5th more of the southern white population of the South. Now that's affirmative action. } 





















VETO MESSAGE
Washington, March 23, 1867.
  To the House of Representatives:

     I have considered the bill entitled "An act supplementary to an act entitled "An act to provide for the more efficient government of the rebel States," passed March 2, 1867, "and to facilitate restoration," and now return it to the House of Representatives with my objections....
     What, then, in the opinion of Congress, is necessary to make the constitution of a State "loyal and republican"? The original act answers the question: It is universal Negro suffrage--a question which the Federal Constitution leaves exclusively to the States themselves. All this legislative machinery of martial law, military coercion, and political disfranchisement is avowedly for that purpose and none other....
     When I contemplate the millions of our fellow-citizens of the South with no alternative left but to impose upon themselves this fearful and untried experiment of complete Negro enfranchisement -- and white disfranchisement. it may be, almost as complete--or submit indefinitely to the rigor of martial law, without a single attribute of freemen, deprived of all the sacred guaranties of our Federal constitution, and threatened with even worse wrongs, if any worse are possible, it seems to me their condition is the most deplorable to which any people can be reduced.
 

 Andrew Johnson

 
 
 










































































 
 























 
   



 


It appears that the black vote was critical to the progress of this nation to "A More Perfect Union" from the Election of Lincoln to save the Union, to the Election of Grant to perfect the Union's constitution. It was the vote of the descendants of the enslaved of African Descent that secured the reconstruction amendments that reconstituted the constitution of 1787 compromised by a cognitive dissonance that could compartmentalize democracy with racial exclusion and establish a franchise based upon disproportionate white minority privilege quotas.  At the very outset the compromised constitutional racial quotas came whole, in fractions, and as a null set: whole if you were white, partial if you were black, zero if you were a Native American. Art.1 Sec. 2 Cl.3.  It was the black vote that provided the winning margins that secured our liberty under the 13th Amend, and provided the  foundation for universal equality under law pursuant to the 14th Amend.

   








 


LINCOLN

 
 
 Ulysses S. Grant , the General who saved the Union, could not win a majority of the white vote. Black voters provided the winning margin of victory in electing Ulysses S. Grant president in the election of 1868. 

 

















In order to reconstruct the South and reconstitute the Constitution, the South's freedmen were enfranchised  thanks to the first Reconstruction Act of March 2, 1867.  Agents of the  Freedmen's Bureau registered  freemen throughout the South to vote for the first time.    Whereas under the Reconstruction Act some white southerners were disenfranchised for disloyalty, black southerners were permitted to vote in elections for the various state constitutional conventions. 

 By the end of 1867, 735,000 blacks, in contrast to 660,000 whites, were registered to vote in the former Confederate states.  Harper's Weekly, September 28, 1867 reported that black voters constituted  a majority in the states of Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas. 

 
 







 








HarpersWeekly_09281867


 





 
 
 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

This Is A White Man's Government,
by Thomas Nast,
Harper’s Weekly, September 5, 1868.

During the 1868 presidential campaign, political cartoonist Thomas Nast ridiculed the Democratic party as a coalition of Irish immigrants (left) white supremacists like Nathan Bedford Forrest leader of the Ku Klux Klan (center), and Northern capitalists represented by Horatio Seymour, the presidential nominee (right). Nast’s cartoon depicted Democrats as the oppressors of the black race, represented by a black Union soldier felled while carrying the American flag and a ballot box. 
 

 
 
 
 



 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

HARPERS WEEKLY _ 06/10/1865


Tennessee is a State which has been reorganized under a constitution which emancipates slaves, and leaves the political rights of the colored citizens to be settled by the Legislature. The consequences might have been foreseen. The House of Representatives of the State has lately passed a series of “black laws,” which constantly allude to the colored citizens as “free” persons of color, as if slavery still existed in the State. The whole series shows indeed that the spirit of slavery does exist. No contract between a white and black citizen is to be binding unless witnessed by a white person. In courts the colored citizens may be witnesses against each other only. On failure to pay jail fees after imprisonment colored citizens may be hired out to the highest bidder. The children of colored citizens, whether orphans or not, may be bound out to white persons at the option of the court, and so on.

Now what the House of Representatives in Tennessee has done every State in which slavery has been abolished by the war will do, if permitted, and four millions of faithful, honest people ... will be reduced to a condition of serfdom.

 
 
 


 

But, says some objector, if the people of the States are opposed to enfranchising them, is it good policy to do it? Let us see. Who are the people of the States? Who are “the people” of South Carolina? Are they the numerical minority of the population who are white rebels, or are they the numerical majority who are colored citizens of unswerving loyalty? It is curious to see how the dominance of slavery in this country has destroyed our perceptions of the simplest facts. ... 

[T]he New York Times lately uses these remarkable words, the italics being its own: “What the President doubtless aims at is to see the people of the South as distinct from the disloyal political managers …..recognize the new relations in which they stand to the negro population.”

The negro population, then, are not even “people!” In such a remark, springing, of course, from no unfair hostility to its colored fellow-citizens, the Times unthinkingly justifies the old lie of slavery that this Government was made by white men for white men, and, therefore, that white men only are, politically speaking, the people. 


 
 
 
 
 
 

PARDON: SHALL I TRUST THESE MEN
FRANCHISE: AND NOT THIS MAN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Southern Congressman Elect to Clerk of The House.
“I should like very much to secure my Old Seat. Governor Perry says I'm, entitled to it.”

Clerk Of The House.
“I am very sorry, Sir, but we can not accommodate you. All the Old
Seats were broken up, and are now being throughly Reconstructed.”

As Congress prepared to convene on December 4, 1865, the clerk of the House, Edward McPherson, announced that he would not recognize representatives elected from the former Confederate states.  His position was based primarily on a congressional act of July 1862, which required congressmen to swear an oath that they had never actively participated against the United States government.  The House upheld his action.  ...  A cartoon in the next week’s issue depicted House Clerk McPherson denying a seat to a Southern congressman-elect. 

 
 
 
 
 









































































March 9, 1867_ p.147























































































Apil 13th, 1867_ p.240
















































































September 28th, 1867_ p.621

































































































































































































































































































































































































































 
 

The Abridgment of Votes by Party Affiliation
The Abridgment of Votes by Race













Unbounded Electoral States



























 
 















 
 











































 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 





































































Washington Post - NATI0NAL NEWS - MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2008 A3


























































































   
Obama's election is both an historic realization of our egalitarian ideals and an ironic testament to our enduring undemocratic legacy. The wide disparity between Obama's popular vote majority and the percentage gap in his lead in the electoral college highlights the undemocratic bias inherent in the nation's "Winner-Take-All" allocation of presidential electors. Obama leads McCain by 53% to 47% in the popular vote, but under "Winner-Take-All" rules, this  6% margin of victory translates into an exaggerated allocation of 364 to 174 electors, with a distorted 35% majority of electors awarded to Obama in the electoral college. A table of votes cast by states reveals a striking comparison between the "Winner-Take-All" method and the proportional apportionment of presidential electors predicated on the popular vote split. This more democratic method would result in an electoral count of 286 to 252, with a percentage electoral advantage of 53% to 47% that matches Obama's popular vote majority.
Table: Apportionment of Presidential Electors

 
 



 
 
 
 
 



The Electoral Map - White Voters Only
   Despite the effusive and delusional musings of  mainstream media political pundits, Barack Obama's victory does not represent an historic enlightened realignment of white voters with regard to racial politics. Obama's organization beat the Republican party organization in energizing, registering and turning out its base, the African-American voter. Obama's share of the White vote represented only a marginal improvement over John Kerry from 41% to 43% over the 2004 Presidential election. However, Obama's improvement over Kerry among African Americans was from 88% to 95%, with an increase from 11% to 13% among the total voter population, along with a corresponding drop of White voters from 77% to 74%. There was a potential realignment among Latino's from 53% to 67%. The  media's delusional bias is revealed in its general failure to report on real voter suppression techniques employed during this election, techniques that target minorities, contrasted with its emphasis on potential voter fraud arising from improper voter registrations prior to the election..

 
 
 
 



 
 
 
 
 



The Electoral Map -White Male Voters Only

However, Obama's election presents historic trends and definitive signs of significant inroads in this  demographic voter's siblings.
A change we can believe in.

Selected Source Data: 
CNN ElectionCenter-2008    : CNN ElectionCenter-2004

Democratizing the Electoral College

 Tables of Winner Take All vs Proportional Allocation of Presidential Electors for "Unbounded Electoral States" Nationally and the "Unbounded Southern States" that are the subjects of litigation in GORDONvsCHENEY

 

 





 


The CNN Wire Latest updates on top stories :April 30th, 2009
Black, white voting rates matched in 2008, study finds
Posted: 03:22 PM ET
(CNN) — Last year, for the first time in U.S. history, blacks and whites voted at roughly the same rates, a new study shows.

The overall turnout rate barely budged, according to an analysis by the Pew Research Center — and turnout among white voters actually declined slightly — but, in another first, participation by African-American women was the highest of any gender or race. Nearly 69 percent of black women voted in November.


























Article 1 Section 2 Clause 3. 
1787

   Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States  which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers,  which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons,  including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. 

Article 2 Section 1 Clause 2. 
1787

   Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,  a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives  to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: ...
Amend. XIV§2 
1868

   Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.