Restitution 246 is *one disciplined lane* of the reparations question. We chose the lane carefully. We named the methodology before we named the number. We made the framework auditable before we asked anyone to subscribe to it. This is what doctrinal discipline looks like in practice — and this is the page where the work is published in full.
What R246 is
R246 is a wage-loss and opportunity-loss accounting for the 246 years of American chattel slavery (1619 to 1865, with the post-emancipation tail accounted separately). The framework rests on three pillars:
- The Five Questions. The doctrinal anchor: who, what, on what evidence, by what mechanism, and on what timeline. Every claim under R246 must answer all five before it enters the open record.
- The Lloyd Kelly framework. A structured accounting model that converts wage-hour estimates into present-value obligations using transparent assumptions on labor share, hours worked, real wage equivalents, compounding rate, and inheritance discount.
- The Craemer (2015) methodology. The peer-reviewed wage-hour methodology that is R246's primary empirical anchor. Where the Craemer methodology has open questions, R246 names them rather than smoothing past them.
What R246 is not
R246 does not address — and explicitly defers to other frameworks for:
- Pain and suffering, mental anguish, intergenerational trauma
- Racial terror (lynching, massacre, pogrom)
- Family separation
- Land theft (Reconstruction-era and 20th-century takings — these belong to a separate land-restitution lane)
- Cultural theft
- Post-Reconstruction wage and opportunity losses (Jim Crow, redlining, etc. — these belong to separate lanes built on the Measure the Wound foundation)
- Every harm that followed the immediate post-emancipation period
These are real, named, foundational injuries. They will be addressed by frameworks built with the same discipline. Restitution 246 is one lane.
The mechanism
R246 proposes a $120T bond held in perpetuity, with interest payments directed to the lineage as the distributable mechanism. The principal is held; the interest is the recurring restitution.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Framework | Lloyd Kelly |
| Methodology | Craemer, 2015 |
| Status | Open Record |
| Mechanism | $120T bond, interest in perpetuity |
| Lane | Wage loss + opportunity loss, 1619–1865 |
The Five Questions
Every campaign decision under R246 — every claim, every figure, every revision — answers these five questions before publication:
- Who is the obligation owed to? The lineage of those who were enslaved on what is now United States territory between 1619 and 1865.
- What is owed? Wage value of stolen labor + opportunity value of denied accumulation, present-valued at a transparent rate.
- On what evidence? Craemer (2015), with named open questions; Census, BLS, and historical wage-hour data; the Lloyd Kelly accounting reconciliation.
- By what mechanism? A perpetuity bond, with interest distributed as recurring restitution. The principal is preserved; the interest funds the obligation.
- On what timeline? The framework is published. The campaign is open. The legislative timeline is the timeline of any sovereign instrument — measured in years, defended in evidence.
Methodology drilldown
R246 publishes the full methodology in the underlying record. The page-level summary:
- Wage-loss component: Hours of enslaved labor × prevailing free-labor wage rate equivalent, compounded forward at a transparent rate.
- Opportunity-loss component: Inheritance, accumulation, and capital-formation differential between the lineage and the unenslaved population, present-valued.
- Reconciliation: The two components are reconciled through the Lloyd Kelly framework, which adjusts for double-counting between wage and opportunity components.
For the full methodology, the dual-source verifications, and the changelog of revisions, see Restitution 246 in The Record and the Measure the Wound foundational record.
Engage with the campaign
The center holds. The work begins.