Question

Why did the Great Compromise and the Three-Fifths Compromise involve so much debate and discussion at the Constitutional Convention?

The states believed the Articles of Confederation were working and did not need to be replaced.
Each state was most concerned for its own interests and needs.

Answer 1

The second statement is correct and the first is not.

Why: delegates were negotiating how political power, taxation, and representation would be allocated for the new national government, and each state pushed for whatever arrangement best protected its own interests.

- Great Compromise: Large states wanted representation based on population (Virginia Plan) so they’d have more influence; small states wanted equal representation (New Jersey Plan) to avoid being dominated. Resolving that fundamental conflict required lengthy debate and the compromise of a bicameral Congress (House by population, Senate equal for each state).

- Three‑Fifths Compromise: Southern states wanted enslaved people counted toward population to increase their representation (but not to expand tax burdens), while Northern states opposed counting slaves for representation or argued they should be taxed. That clash over representation, taxation, and the political power derived from slavery produced intense dispute and the three‑fifths formula.

Also important: the Convention was designing the entire structure of the new government, so delegates were wrestling with core constitutional principles (federal vs. state power, majority rule vs. minority protection) and with the morally and economically fraught issue of slavery. Those high stakes and conflicting regional interests made compromise difficult and hotly debated.