Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Flag amendment closer to passage
Casper Star Tribune ^ | 6/13/06 | Margaret Talev

Posted on 06/13/2006 11:44:31 AM PDT by pissant

WASHINGTON -- Sometime between now and the Fourth of July, the Senate plans to revisit what over the course of 17 years has become a seasonal rite of patriotism on Capitol Hill: a vote on whether to amend the Constitution to ban protesters from burning the American flag.

Each time, the arguments on both sides are passionate. Each time, the support needed to move ahead with an amendment falls short.

But this year could be different, as two important trends cross paths.

For one, proponents of the amendment appear to have more support than ever in the Senate. They say they are within one vote of the two-thirds majority they need. The House already has backed the amendment. A majority of Americans say they support a flag amendment, and over time all 50 states have passed some form of resolution urging Congress to act. "We believe once the amendment moves off of Capitol Hill it will be the swiftest-ratified amendment in the history of the nation," said Marty Justis of Indianapolis, a Navy veteran and executive director of the Citizens' Flag Alliance, which for years has led the campaign. He and other supporters will be back on Capitol Hill on Wednesday -- Flag Day -- trying to round up and lock in support.

At the same time, some polling indicates Americans' once-robust support for a flag amendment is waning and could be tough to recapture for many years if it slips below 50 percent. That has amendment opponents -- a mix of liberals, free-speech activists and conservatives who believe the Constitution should never or almost never be amended -- determined to stave off Senate passage.

"This is very generational -- basically, if this doesn't pass the next Congress or two, it's a dying issue," said Terri Ann Schroeder, a senior lobbyist for the American Civil Liberties Union, which opposes the amendment as an infringement on free speech.

The dynamics of what's going on in the Senate this year may have as much to do with the histories of the individual lawmakers as with the pressure to be patriotic on Capitol Hill post-9/11 and in the midst of the Iraq war.

Some longtime opponents of the amendment retired in recent years, replaced by newcomers whose campaign platforms included support of a flag amendment, or by former House members who supported the amendment there.

The lower chamber has voted on the amendment more frequently than the Senate, and with less consequence; its fate always has been up to the Senate. The vote Republican leader Bill Frist of Tennessee has promised this year would be the Senate's first vote on the proposed amendment since 2000, when it fell four votes shy.

If senators' past votes and public statements are a fair indicator, there are now 66 proponents. With all 100 members present, that would leave them one vote shy of the 67 votes needed to move ahead. But if one or two opponents are out at any given time, reducing the two-thirds threshold to 66 votes or fewer, backers of the amendment could make a go at it.

The divisions on the issue are not entirely partisan. Activists count 14 Democrats among the 66 proponents. Of 34 senators believed to oppose the amendment, three are Republicans, including GOP Whip Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

Meanwhile, the Gallup organization pegged national support for a flag amendment at 71 percent in 1989, but found support had slipped to 63 percent by 1999, and to 55 percent by last summer.

Gallup's numbers are not uniformly accepted. The First Amendment Center, a free-speech advocacy organization, pegs support at below 50 percent. The Citizens' Flag Alliance has just conducted its own polling in 10 states, meanwhile, and claims Gallup's and the First Amendment Center's polls both are wrong and that support for protecting the flag is really as strong as it's ever been.

In the 1960s and '70s, opposition to the Vietnam War triggered its share of flag burnings back home.

But the push for an amendment that gives Congress the express power to pass laws banning flag desecration began far later, in 1989, as the Cold War was coming to an end. The trigger was a 5-4 ruling by the Supreme Court invalidating a Texas law used to convict a man who in 1984 burned a flag in protest of Republican policies.

The high court said flag burning is protected as an expression of free speech. Congress responded with the Flag Protection Act, a federal law banning flag burning. In 1990, the Supreme Court overturned that law as well.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: baloney; bogosity; distraction; diversion; evasion; hopefully; manbehindthecurtain; razzledazzle; shellgame; smokescreen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-238 next last
Time to protect Old Glory


1 posted on 06/13/2006 11:44:32 AM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: pissant

Preventing anti-American protesters from expressing themselves in such a clear and invocative manner makes it harder to tell whom to shoot.


2 posted on 06/13/2006 11:49:08 AM PDT by Omedalus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth; Mo1

A background story for you Senate watchers.


3 posted on 06/13/2006 11:49:19 AM PDT by Bahbah (Democrat Motto: Why not the worst)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Omedalus

You can tell by the smell.


4 posted on 06/13/2006 11:50:27 AM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Greece has a stiff penalty for messing with their flag.


5 posted on 06/13/2006 11:50:42 AM PDT by SamAdams_Lite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams_Lite

You mean GWB's "grecian" friends already ahve protections?


6 posted on 06/13/2006 11:52:17 AM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: pissant
The SCOTUS ruled that flag burning was protected under the free speech clause of the First Amendment. IMO, flag burning is an expression of political preferences versus the ability to say what one pleases.

The Founding Fathers were exceptionally bright, intelligent and thoughtful men. Had they foreseen the need to protect expression as a form of free speech, I believe that they would have included it in the Constitution. IMO, flag burning should NOT be protected as a right under the Constitution, but I also don't see our gutless elected reps doing anything to change it.
7 posted on 06/13/2006 11:52:38 AM PDT by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

I voted against flag burning before I voted for it.

/Sarcasm off

8 posted on 06/13/2006 11:52:52 AM PDT by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bahbah

Thanks


9 posted on 06/13/2006 11:53:25 AM PDT by Mo1 (DEMOCRATS: A CULTURE OF TREASON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sr4402

Every feminist should be burning the flag right now!

/Sarcasm Off

10 posted on 06/13/2006 11:54:13 AM PDT by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sr4402

Shut up, you two, it's almost July 4th!

/Sarcasm OFF

11 posted on 06/13/2006 11:55:54 AM PDT by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sr4402

"I voted against flag burning before I voted for it. "

He also claimed to burn his own flag only to later admit it was his neighbors flag.


12 posted on 06/13/2006 11:56:29 AM PDT by msjhall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sr4402

Nobody shuts me up while I'm condemning our troops!

/Sarcasm OFF

13 posted on 06/13/2006 11:56:55 AM PDT by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sr4402

Be quiet you old fart, we were talking about democrats burning the flag, not you burning the troopers!

/Sarcasm OFF

14 posted on 06/13/2006 11:59:25 AM PDT by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Why don't they just make it out of fireproof material? Neh that would be too easy.


15 posted on 06/13/2006 12:00:59 PM PDT by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sr4402

Talk about burning, we should all worry about my inconvienient truth. I'm Mr. Global-Warmed-Over and how dare you steal my hot air!

/sarcasm off

16 posted on 06/13/2006 12:01:50 PM PDT by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sr4402

Great posts!!


17 posted on 06/13/2006 12:04:06 PM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sr4402

Cool off Al. You should take a dip in it, Mr. Imputus-for-the-Love Canal. I've got a health care plan that will heal every flag burner. So there!

/Sarcasm OFF

18 posted on 06/13/2006 12:04:29 PM PDT by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: pissant

I think the flag burning amendement is being pushed by those who think symbolism over substance.

They are trying to obscure the Federal Marriage Amendment with something that is obviously a pander.

Let me guess, McCain supports this limit on the first amendment but opposes the protection of marriage.


19 posted on 06/13/2006 12:04:45 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain
The only drawback to banning flag burning is that we won't see any leftist protesters accidentally go up in flames.
20 posted on 06/13/2006 12:05:35 PM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-238 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson