Flag amendment on the horizon again
You might think the U.S. Senate would be a tad busy this month, what with having to deal with a Supreme Court vacancy and all, but it is never too busy to take care of a piece of legislation that has become a political gut check: a constitutional amendment to ban flag desecration.
The amendment, which was adopted by the House of Representatives last month, has come before Congress in one wording or another six times in the past 10 years but has always failed in the Senate. Both the Senate and House must pass the amendment by two-thirds votes before it can go to the states for ratification.
While proponents and opponents generally agree that there has not been a rash of flag burnings in this country recently, the amendment energizes both conservatives, because they see it as protecting a sacred symbol of America, and liberals, who consider it a weakening of the First Amendment. (In 1989, the Supreme Court ruled by a 5-4 vote that burning an American flag is protected as free speech.)
Proponents believe they are within one vote of passage in the Senate, but not all the senators have revealed their intentions, and party affiliation is not always a reliable indicator of how a senator will vote. According to published reports, at least three Democrats–Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Bill Nelson of Florida, and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, all of whom face tough re-election campaigns in 2006–will vote for the amendment.
At least one Republican, Bob Bennett of Utah, will oppose the amendment, though last week he introduced legislation protecting the flag from desecration. This "wiggle" position–the Supreme Court might very well strike down such legislation once again–is also the one adopted by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York.
Bennett's colleague from Utah, Orrin Hatch, also a Republican, is the Senate sponsor of the amendment and told a reporter that senators proposing a law instead of an amendment are "doing that to cover their backsides so people won't be mad at them."
While the White House plays no constitutional role in the amendment process, it has endorsed the amendment, and political tea-leaf readers view the outcome as a sign of whether conservative forces really are ascendant in U.S. politics or not.
Terri Ann Schroeder, senior lobbyist for the American Civil Liberties Union, recently told a reporter, "We cannot guarantee that we will win this vote. My concern is that we will wake up the next morning and say, 'Oops, did we just amend the First Amendment?' "
Since the Constitution took effect in 1789, Congress has considered more than 11,000 amendments to it. Only 27, including the Bill of Rights, have been ratified.