Lt. Gov. Beckwith’s Comments on Three-Fifths Compromise Spark Outrage, Calls for Stronger Condemnation

Lt Governor Micah Beckwith faces backlash for racist comment.

By Gabriel Whitley Published: 5:38 PM EDT, May 7, 2025

INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith’s recent remarks praising the Three-Fifths Compromise as “a great move” have ignited widespread criticism from state leaders, community activists, and clergy, who are urging Gov. Mike Braun to issue a stronger denouncement of the comments. The controversy stems from a video Beckwith posted on his X page on April 24, 2025, in response to a legislative debate over a Senate bill that Democrats likened to the 1787 constitutional clause, which counted enslaved people as three-fifths of a person for representation and taxation purposes.

The Three-Fifths Compromise, a product of the Constitutional Convention, has long been a symbol of the nation’s historical complicity in slavery, balancing the political power of slaveholding states while dehumanizing enslaved individuals. Beckwith’s characterization of the compromise as “a great move” has been met with sharp rebuke, with critics arguing it minimizes the moral and historical weight of the clause.

Legislative Context and Initial Response

Beckwith’s comments were prompted by a debate during the 2025 legislative session, where Democrats drew parallels between the Three-Fifths Compromise and a Senate bill under consideration. The exact nature of the bill remains unspecified in public discourse, but the comparison sparked Beckwith’s controversial video. In it, he framed the compromise as a pragmatic and positive step, a stance that has drawn ire for its apparent insensitivity to the legacy of slavery.

Gov. Mike Braun addressed the remarks on April 30, distancing himself from Beckwith’s wording. “I definitely wouldn’t have used that characterization, and I don’t like it,” Braun said. “I’m a believer that you better start thinking about what you’re saying before it comes out. So, I’ll leave it at that.” Braun emphasized the importance of avoiding divisive headlines that detract from substantive policy work. However, his response has been criticized as insufficient by community leaders seeking a more forceful condemnation.

Community Leaders Demand Action

On May 2, a coalition of senators, pastors, and activists gathered at Purpose of Life Ministries in Indianapolis to voice their concerns. The press conference underscored the broader implications of Beckwith’s remarks, framing them as part of a pattern of unchecked rhetoric from those in power. State Sen. Andrea Hunley (D-District 46) emphasized the deeper significance of the controversy: “This isn’t just about one comment about revisionist history. This isn’t just about one demeaning of the Black community. This is about a larger conversation. This is about what it represents. It represents this ability for people in positions of power to be unchecked when they say things about the Black community.”

IU professor Lasana Kazembe called on Braun to take decisive action, suggesting a formal censure of Beckwith or further measures to address the “corrosive” impact of the comments. “The governor still has an opportunity to put a corrective on a corrosive by actually censuring the lieutenant governor if not going further,” Kazembe said. Leaders expressed hope that the controversy could spark meaningful dialogue, with Kazembe noting that both Braun and Beckwith are welcome to engage with the community at Purpose of Life Ministries. “That is what the people are actually waiting for and encouraging to happen,” he added.

Broader Implications and Beckwith’s Silence

The backlash highlights the sensitivity of historical narratives in contemporary political discourse, particularly when they intersect with issues of race and power. Critics argue that Beckwith’s comments risk perpetuating harmful revisionist interpretations of history, undermining efforts to address systemic inequities. The controversy also raises questions about the responsibilities of elected officials to confront divisive rhetoric within their ranks.

When contacted by the Hoosier Enquirer and Editor in Chief Gabriel Whitley, Beckwith’s office declined to provide further comment, leaving his initial remarks on X as the primary source of his stance. The lack of clarification has fueled calls for accountability, with community leaders urging both Beckwith and Braun to engage directly with affected communities.

A Path Forward?

As the debate unfolds, the controversy serves as a flashpoint for broader discussions about leadership, historical accountability, and racial justice in Indiana. Community leaders remain hopeful that the incident will prompt constructive dialogue, but they insist that such progress requires more than tepid disapproval from the governor’s office. Whether Braun or Beckwith will take up the invitation to engage directly with critics remains uncertain, but the pressure for accountability shows no signs of abating.

For now, the state watches as its leaders navigate the fallout from a comment that has reopened old wounds and underscored the enduring relevance of America’s historical reckoning with slavery.

Gabriel Whitley is a reporter for the Hoosier Enquirer. Contact him at gabrielwhitley@hoosierenquirer.com.