Flag Abuse Ban Goes Down In Flames
The San Fransisco Chronicle Is Reporting:
Senate defeats flag abuse ban by single vote
Edward Epstein, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Washington -- The Senate fell one vote short Tuesday of the two-thirds needed to pass a constitutional amendment that would have given Congress the power to ban desecration of the U.S. flag after a debate that pitted the importance of the nation's symbols against a citizen's right to freedom of speech.
The failure of the amendment, pushed to the floor by the Republican leadership, echoed the defeat this month of an amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
The 66-to-34 vote on the one-sentence flag amendment disappointed advocates who had believed they could muster the 67 votes needed for passage in the Senate and send the amendment to the states.
But opponents were heartened that they again had defeated what they said was an unprecedented attempt to turn back free speech rights and a Republican election-year ploy to rally the party's conservative base for the November congressional elections.
"It's a simple amendment, but it speaks to the fact that the flag is the single symbol that protects our liberty and freedom," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said before the vote, which he timed to be close to the Fourth of July holiday.
The vote was another setback for Frist, who also had pushed the same-sex marriage amendment to the floor earlier this month. That measure failed on June 7 to get the 60 votes needed to cut off debate and force a final vote.
The proposed flag amendment, which in its entirety reads, "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States," was a bipartisan measure. Its chief sponsor was Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and the chief co-sponsor was Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who is running for re-election in November.
California's other senator, Democrat Barbara Boxer, opposed the amendment, as she did when the Senate voted on it in 2000. The amendment received 63 votes then.
This was the amendment's fourth defeat in the Senate. The House has passed it six times by at least the necessary two-thirds vote, including last year's 286-130 vote.
Feinstein, who flies the U.S. flag over her San Francisco and Washington homes, has been an outspoken advocate of a flag desecration amendment since the U.S. Supreme Court, ruling in two 5-4 votes in 1989 and 1990, found that federal and state laws banning flag burning and other acts of desecration were unconstitutional infringements of free speech.
On the Senate floor, the 73-year-old Feinstein recalled how, as a young girl, she was inspired when she picked up the Feb. 24, 1945, edition of The Chronicle and saw photographer Joe Rosenthal's famous picture of Marines raising the flag on Iwo Jima.
With a blow-up of the Rosenthal photo next to her, she described it as a wartime "bolt of electricity" that left her with an abiding feeling that the flag was more than a symbol.
Quoting the late Supreme Court Justice Byron White, she said, "The flag is itself a monument, subject to civil protection."
"Freedom of speech enshrined in the First Amendment is the cornerstone of our great nation," she said. "But any thought expressed in the burning of the flag can be expressed equally well in another manner."
On the other side, World War II Medal of Honor recipient Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, said the proposed amendment was a mistake.
"I have no patience for those who defile our flag," said Inouye, who lost an arm in Italy in 1945. But he said limiting speech was dangerous.
"We should make sure all Americans have the right to express themselves, even those who harbor evil thoughts," Inouye said.
Boxer said she also found flag desecration repugnant but still opposed the amendment.
"There are many things in life that we find offensive, repugnant to beliefs that we hold dear,'' she said. "But we cannot amend the Constitution every time there is something we consider outrageous, offensive or repugnant.''
Hatch said the debate wasn't really about the flag or free speech. Rather, he said, it was about Congress taking back its right to control the Constitution from unelected Supreme Court members and restoring the pre-1989 situation. "All we want to do is restore power back to the Congress," he said.
Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., saw the flag debate mainly as election year maneuvering. "Our Republican leaders' priorities are being driven by election-year politics," Kennedy said.
Hatch retorted, "Election year politics? How does he explain the fact that the House has passed this six times and that 50 states, including his, have petitioned us for this amendment?
"Is this the most important thing the Senate can be doing now? I can tell you it is,'' Hatch continued. "We had five unelected justices change the Constitution and usurping the power of the Congress."
Fifty-two Republicans and 14 Democrats approved the amendment. Thirty Democrats, three Republicans and the Senate's one independent opposed the measure.
Amendment advocates said flag burning isn't speech. Retired Army Maj. Gen Patrick Brady, chairman of the Citizens Flag Alliance, said, "This is not about flag burning. It's about people who say flag burning is speech. Burning the flag is not speech, period."
Brady said that if the amendment ever wins approval and allows Congress and the states to impose flag desecration penalties, he isn't looking for heavy penalties that would turn those convicted into martyrs.
"I'd give them a ticket and set them loose," said Brady, who received the Medal of Honor as a helicopter rescue pilot in Vietnam.
Before rejecting the amendment, the Senate voted 64-36 against an amendment offered by Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., the Democrats' deputy leader.
Narrowly drawn to give it a chance to pass judicial review, it would have made it against the law to damage a U.S. flag on federal property with intent of breaching the peace or intimidating other people. It also would have prohibited unapproved demonstrations at military funerals.
Senate vote on flag amendment
The Senate failed by one vote, 66-34, to reach the two-thirds necessary to pass a constitutional amendment that would have given Congress the power to ban the desecration of the U.S. flag. Here is the vote:
Yes
Alexander, R-Tenn., Allard, R-Colo., Allen, R-Va., Baucus, D-Mont., Bayh, D-Ind., Bond, R-Mo., Brownback, R-Kan., Bunning, R-Ky., Burns, R-Mont., Burr, R-N.C., Chambliss, R-Ga., Coburn, R-Okla., Cochran, R-Miss., Coleman, R-Minn., Collins, R-Maine, Cornyn, R-Texas, Craig, R-Idaho., Crapo, R-Idaho, Dayton, D-Minn., DeMint, R-S.C., DeWine, R-Ohio, Dole, R-N.C., Domenici, R-N.M., Ensign, R-Nev., Enzi, R-Wyo., Feinstein, D-Calif., Frist, R-Tenn., Graham, R-S.C., Grassley, R-Iowa, Gregg, R-N.H., Hagel, R-Neb., Hatch, R-Utah, Hutchison, R-Texas, Inhofe, R-Okla., Isakson, R-Ga., Johnson, D-S.D., Kyl, R-Ariz., Landrieu, D-La., Lincoln, D-Ark., Lott, R-Miss., Lugar, R-Ind., Martinez, R-Fla., McCain, R-Ariz., Menendez, D-N.J., Murkowski, R-Alaska, Nelson, D-Fla., Nelson , D-Neb., Reid, D-Nev., Roberts, R-Kan., Rockefeller , D-W.Va., Salazar, D-Colo., Santorum, R-Pa., Sessions, R-Ala., Shelby, R-Ala., Smith, R-Ore., Snowe, R-Maine, Specter , R-Pa., Stabenow, D-Mich., Stevens, R-Alaska, Sununu, R-N.H. Talent, R-Mo., Thomas, R-Wyo., Thune, R-S.D., Vitter, R-La., Voinovich, R-Ohio, Warner, R-Va.
No
Akaka, D-Hawaii, Bennett, R-Utah, Biden, D-Del., Bingaman, D-N.M., Boxer, D-Calif., Byrd, D-W.Va., Cantwell, D-Wash., Carper, D-Del., Chafee, R-R.I., Clinton, D-N.Y., Conrad, D-N.D., Dodd, D-Conn., Dorgan, D-N.D., Durbin, D-Ill., Feingold, D-Wis., Harkin, D-Iowa, Inouye, D-Hawaii, Jeffords, I-Vt., Kennedy, D-Mass., Kerry, D-Mass., Kohl, D-Wis., Lautenberg, D-N.J., Leahy, D-Vt., Levin, D-Mich., Lieberman, D-Conn., McConnell, R-Ky., Mikulski, D-Md., Murray, D-Wash., Obama, D-Ill., Pryor, D-Ark., Reed, D-R.I., Sarbanes, D-Md., Schumer, D-N.Y., Wyden, D-Ore.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hillary In "Tragic" Flag Flap With Liberals
Read Full Story Here
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh how I wanted to catch one of you Lunatic Liberals, you sadistic bastards, burning a Flag so I could have placed you under Citizen's arrest!! Oh Well Maybe Someday!
Senate defeats flag abuse ban by single vote
Edward Epstein, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Washington -- The Senate fell one vote short Tuesday of the two-thirds needed to pass a constitutional amendment that would have given Congress the power to ban desecration of the U.S. flag after a debate that pitted the importance of the nation's symbols against a citizen's right to freedom of speech.
The failure of the amendment, pushed to the floor by the Republican leadership, echoed the defeat this month of an amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
The 66-to-34 vote on the one-sentence flag amendment disappointed advocates who had believed they could muster the 67 votes needed for passage in the Senate and send the amendment to the states.
But opponents were heartened that they again had defeated what they said was an unprecedented attempt to turn back free speech rights and a Republican election-year ploy to rally the party's conservative base for the November congressional elections.
"It's a simple amendment, but it speaks to the fact that the flag is the single symbol that protects our liberty and freedom," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said before the vote, which he timed to be close to the Fourth of July holiday.
The vote was another setback for Frist, who also had pushed the same-sex marriage amendment to the floor earlier this month. That measure failed on June 7 to get the 60 votes needed to cut off debate and force a final vote.
The proposed flag amendment, which in its entirety reads, "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States," was a bipartisan measure. Its chief sponsor was Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and the chief co-sponsor was Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who is running for re-election in November.
California's other senator, Democrat Barbara Boxer, opposed the amendment, as she did when the Senate voted on it in 2000. The amendment received 63 votes then.
This was the amendment's fourth defeat in the Senate. The House has passed it six times by at least the necessary two-thirds vote, including last year's 286-130 vote.
Feinstein, who flies the U.S. flag over her San Francisco and Washington homes, has been an outspoken advocate of a flag desecration amendment since the U.S. Supreme Court, ruling in two 5-4 votes in 1989 and 1990, found that federal and state laws banning flag burning and other acts of desecration were unconstitutional infringements of free speech.
On the Senate floor, the 73-year-old Feinstein recalled how, as a young girl, she was inspired when she picked up the Feb. 24, 1945, edition of The Chronicle and saw photographer Joe Rosenthal's famous picture of Marines raising the flag on Iwo Jima.
With a blow-up of the Rosenthal photo next to her, she described it as a wartime "bolt of electricity" that left her with an abiding feeling that the flag was more than a symbol.
Quoting the late Supreme Court Justice Byron White, she said, "The flag is itself a monument, subject to civil protection."
"Freedom of speech enshrined in the First Amendment is the cornerstone of our great nation," she said. "But any thought expressed in the burning of the flag can be expressed equally well in another manner."
On the other side, World War II Medal of Honor recipient Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, said the proposed amendment was a mistake.
"I have no patience for those who defile our flag," said Inouye, who lost an arm in Italy in 1945. But he said limiting speech was dangerous.
"We should make sure all Americans have the right to express themselves, even those who harbor evil thoughts," Inouye said.
Boxer said she also found flag desecration repugnant but still opposed the amendment.
"There are many things in life that we find offensive, repugnant to beliefs that we hold dear,'' she said. "But we cannot amend the Constitution every time there is something we consider outrageous, offensive or repugnant.''
Hatch said the debate wasn't really about the flag or free speech. Rather, he said, it was about Congress taking back its right to control the Constitution from unelected Supreme Court members and restoring the pre-1989 situation. "All we want to do is restore power back to the Congress," he said.
Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., saw the flag debate mainly as election year maneuvering. "Our Republican leaders' priorities are being driven by election-year politics," Kennedy said.
Hatch retorted, "Election year politics? How does he explain the fact that the House has passed this six times and that 50 states, including his, have petitioned us for this amendment?
"Is this the most important thing the Senate can be doing now? I can tell you it is,'' Hatch continued. "We had five unelected justices change the Constitution and usurping the power of the Congress."
Fifty-two Republicans and 14 Democrats approved the amendment. Thirty Democrats, three Republicans and the Senate's one independent opposed the measure.
Amendment advocates said flag burning isn't speech. Retired Army Maj. Gen Patrick Brady, chairman of the Citizens Flag Alliance, said, "This is not about flag burning. It's about people who say flag burning is speech. Burning the flag is not speech, period."
Brady said that if the amendment ever wins approval and allows Congress and the states to impose flag desecration penalties, he isn't looking for heavy penalties that would turn those convicted into martyrs.
"I'd give them a ticket and set them loose," said Brady, who received the Medal of Honor as a helicopter rescue pilot in Vietnam.
Before rejecting the amendment, the Senate voted 64-36 against an amendment offered by Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., the Democrats' deputy leader.
Narrowly drawn to give it a chance to pass judicial review, it would have made it against the law to damage a U.S. flag on federal property with intent of breaching the peace or intimidating other people. It also would have prohibited unapproved demonstrations at military funerals.
Senate vote on flag amendment
The Senate failed by one vote, 66-34, to reach the two-thirds necessary to pass a constitutional amendment that would have given Congress the power to ban the desecration of the U.S. flag. Here is the vote:
Yes
Alexander, R-Tenn., Allard, R-Colo., Allen, R-Va., Baucus, D-Mont., Bayh, D-Ind., Bond, R-Mo., Brownback, R-Kan., Bunning, R-Ky., Burns, R-Mont., Burr, R-N.C., Chambliss, R-Ga., Coburn, R-Okla., Cochran, R-Miss., Coleman, R-Minn., Collins, R-Maine, Cornyn, R-Texas, Craig, R-Idaho., Crapo, R-Idaho, Dayton, D-Minn., DeMint, R-S.C., DeWine, R-Ohio, Dole, R-N.C., Domenici, R-N.M., Ensign, R-Nev., Enzi, R-Wyo., Feinstein, D-Calif., Frist, R-Tenn., Graham, R-S.C., Grassley, R-Iowa, Gregg, R-N.H., Hagel, R-Neb., Hatch, R-Utah, Hutchison, R-Texas, Inhofe, R-Okla., Isakson, R-Ga., Johnson, D-S.D., Kyl, R-Ariz., Landrieu, D-La., Lincoln, D-Ark., Lott, R-Miss., Lugar, R-Ind., Martinez, R-Fla., McCain, R-Ariz., Menendez, D-N.J., Murkowski, R-Alaska, Nelson, D-Fla., Nelson , D-Neb., Reid, D-Nev., Roberts, R-Kan., Rockefeller , D-W.Va., Salazar, D-Colo., Santorum, R-Pa., Sessions, R-Ala., Shelby, R-Ala., Smith, R-Ore., Snowe, R-Maine, Specter , R-Pa., Stabenow, D-Mich., Stevens, R-Alaska, Sununu, R-N.H. Talent, R-Mo., Thomas, R-Wyo., Thune, R-S.D., Vitter, R-La., Voinovich, R-Ohio, Warner, R-Va.
No
Akaka, D-Hawaii, Bennett, R-Utah, Biden, D-Del., Bingaman, D-N.M., Boxer, D-Calif., Byrd, D-W.Va., Cantwell, D-Wash., Carper, D-Del., Chafee, R-R.I., Clinton, D-N.Y., Conrad, D-N.D., Dodd, D-Conn., Dorgan, D-N.D., Durbin, D-Ill., Feingold, D-Wis., Harkin, D-Iowa, Inouye, D-Hawaii, Jeffords, I-Vt., Kennedy, D-Mass., Kerry, D-Mass., Kohl, D-Wis., Lautenberg, D-N.J., Leahy, D-Vt., Levin, D-Mich., Lieberman, D-Conn., McConnell, R-Ky., Mikulski, D-Md., Murray, D-Wash., Obama, D-Ill., Pryor, D-Ark., Reed, D-R.I., Sarbanes, D-Md., Schumer, D-N.Y., Wyden, D-Ore.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hillary In "Tragic" Flag Flap With Liberals
Read Full Story Here
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh how I wanted to catch one of you Lunatic Liberals, you sadistic bastards, burning a Flag so I could have placed you under Citizen's arrest!! Oh Well Maybe Someday!
posted by Marie's Two Cents | 11:04 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home