Flag amendment moves forward

Now that the House has approved a constitutional amendment on flag “desecration,” constitution huggers have to hope that the Senate can come through and block this nonsense once again. It looks like it’ll be extremely close, with literally one or two votes making the difference.

When the Senate considered the issue in 1995 and 2000, the amendment received 63 votes, four shy of the threshold.

“We count 65 votes [in the Senate] based on voting records and talks,” said Marty Justis, executive director of the Citizens Flag Alliance, which has been lobbying Congress to pass the amendment.

They’ll need 67 votes for passage. The ACLU’s Terri Ann Schroeder said proponents may not get those last two votes, but added, “[I]f one person who opposes doesn’t vote, we are within one. And when we are within one, that changes the dynamics, and we are afraid of switchers. We cannot guarantee that we will win this vote [in the Senate]. My concern is that we will wake up the next morning and say, ‘Oops, did we just amend the 1st Amendment?’ ”

It sure sounds like we’re moving very close to doing just that. Keep in mind, this would be the first time the Bill of Rights is revised to restrict rather than expand freedom of expression. The party that claims the mantle of “limited government” thinks that’s a great idea.

I have to admit, watching the floor debate yesterday, and hearing some of the truly breathtaking remarks offered by supporters of the amendment, I kept thinking about a picture I saw last week.

flag

The kid in the middle is 14 and lives in a small town in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. The gentleman to the right is a veteran who’s active with his local chapter of the American Legion. And as far as 286 members of the U.S. House are concerned, they should probably be considered criminals.

This picture was taken at an American Legion Flag Day service at which over 300 flags were destroyed. Similar events are held every year, all over the country. Burning the flag is the proper way of disposing of damaged or unserviceable flags. As Atrios noted, it’s even part of the official U.S. Flag code.

I realize that lawmakers, no matter how unbalanced, have no interest in prosecuting the patriotic Americans in the picture above, but I honestly want advocates of the amendment to explain how, exactly, they plan to create a distinction between good people who burn flags out of reverence and bad people who burn flags in protest. The amendment wants to make one’s thoughts the standard for criminality — and that will never work.

Even if lawmakers were to create some kind of exception for flag-burners who are disposing of damaged or unserviceable flags, it wouldn’t resolve the problem. Protestors could merely express their anger by — you guessed it — burning damaged or unserviceable flags.

The House in 2003 passed the proposed amendment with a 300-125 vote, so this current tally (286-130) actually is a bit of an improvement. But the Senate is still the real crucible, here. I have sent a letter to Mary Landrieu (my Senator) laying out every PRACTICAL reason I could think of to oppose the amendment without even mentioning civil liberties. If she votes against it, I’ll be happy to take the credit.

  • Now, if someone wraps themselves in a flag and sets it on fire (for self-immolation purposes) who will they prosecute?

    Maybe we can ask one of these politicians to try it for a test case.

  • This, too, shall pass. In the house – yes. In the senate – eventually (given a proper concurrence of paranoia and pandering). Thru ratification by the states – it has happened before. But never underestimate the collective ingenuity of citizens to outmaneuver stupid law, even at this level (ref amendment XXI). CB illustrates this perfectly. Burn damaged flags.

  • They’ll make the distinction between good people and bad people the way they’ve always made it — not according to law but according to their own prejudices: Bushies are God’s gift to an undeserving nation; everyone else is an evil-doing traitor. In the 1960s it was traitorous of Jerry Rubin to wear flag imagery in protest of the Vietnam War; at the last Republican convention it seemed to draped around every brainless tub-of-lard in attendance.

  • This is a craven response to the Iraq War poll numbers. Repubs are patriots, Dems are traitors. They’ve been running this for years, and until recently the war was their tool of choice. Now that most Americans do not support the war, they had to move on to something else.

    I suspect (hope) this ‘issue’ has past it’s shelf life, and the repubs are desparately grasping for something to grandstand upon. Given the real problems these ‘brave patriots’ could put their attention to, this is fiddling while Rome burns.

    Just as the repub’s solution to the healthcare crisis was Terri Schiavo, their solution to national security is to ban the burning of the flag. Pathetic.

  • This is what you get when you live in Cartoon Country, where everything is made of false dichotomies: you are either for this amendment, or you are a traitor. It’s simple, see? It’s just like the movies! Or the damned TV “news”. Anything that takes longer than 10 seconds to understand is too complicated– we’ve got to go to commercial now.

    This is the country where C students are elected president, and Ph.D.’s get ridiculed and/or fired. Please don’t ask these fucking idiots to think. They’re just not interested.

  • Yes, and then they can make flag desecration
    punishable by death by crucifixion on the
    White House lawn, or the Mall. Then they could
    exhume Terri Shiavo and have her preserved
    complete with smile and motorized eyeballs, and
    blinking eyelids. They could sit her in a wheel
    chair and Tom Delay and Bill Frist could hold
    hands with her at the same time while they
    sing the National Anthem during the crucifixtions.

    Then Bush would appear in front of the Lincoln
    Memorial, holding a stone tablet of the Five
    Commandments. (The Republicans having already
    repealed the ones about false gods, lying, stealing,
    killing, and lusting.) From there Bush would give
    the thumbs down signal, and enforcers would step
    foward, and start breaking the legs of the perps on
    the crosses……

  • Comments are closed.