Background on Senate Bill 289

Indiana’s Senate Bill 289, which aims to limit diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in educational institutions, has sparked significant debate. The legislation recently passed both chambers of the state legislature and is now awaiting the signature of Governor Mike Braun.

Contention Over the Three-Fifths Compromise

During an emotional legislative debate, Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith criticized state Senate Democrats for comparing the proposed bill’s implications to the historical Three-Fifths Compromise.

“They were saying this is a bad bill because it actually encourages discrimination, just like the Three-Fifths Compromise going all the way back to the foundations of our nation,” Beckwith remarked in a video shared on X.

Beckwith contended that the Three-Fifths Compromise was not a mechanism for endorsing discrimination but was instead a complex decision made to balance political representation between northern and southern states during the formation of the U.S. Constitution.

Key Provisions of Senate Bill 289

The bill seeks to:

• Restrict DEI programs at K-12 schools and public universities.
• Allow individuals to initiate lawsuits against institutions promoting any notion of inherent superiority or inferiority based on race, ethnicity, or religion.
• Introduce transparency requirements for DEI-related training documentation.
• Repeal existing provisions related to university diversity committees.

This legislative move aligns with Governor Braun’s executive actions prioritizing merit over DEI initiatives within state governance.

Historical Context and Discussion

Beckwith emphasized the historical context of the Three-Fifths Compromise, asserting that it emerged from a compromise between northern states and slave-holding southern states. He explained:

“They had not really created a Constitution. They were sort of a European Union-esque nation, and they were saying to the pro-slave states, ‘Hey, if you want to count your slaves to have representation, we’re not going to let you do that,’ because they knew that would codify things like slavery into our nation,” Beckwith stated.

This comprised an effort to limit the political power of pro-slavery states by counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for congressional representation, ultimately reducing their influence.

Criticism and Response

Critics have argued that the bill overlooks America’s historical injustices, citing the Three-Fifths Compromise and other discriminatory practices. However, Beckwith urged individuals to reassess their understanding of these historical agreements and their implications for modern governance.