Text 13674, 100 rader
Skriven 2005-06-22 21:47:00 av Jeff Binkley (1:226/600)
Ärende: Flag
============
I want Hillary and Joe to oppose this...  This is an excellent election 
debate issue.

=========================================

House Approves Move to Outlaw Flag Burning
 
 
 Email this Story

Jun 22, 7:01 PM (ET)

By LAURIE KELLMAN
 

WASHINGTON (AP) - A constitutional amendment to outlaw flag burning 
cleared the House Wednesday but faced an uphill battle in the Senate. An 
informal survey by The Associated Press suggested the measure doesn't 
have enough Senate votes to pass.

The 286-130 outcome was never in doubt in the House, which had passed 
the measure or one like it five times in recent years. The amendment's 
supporters expressed optimism that a Republican gain of four seats in 
last November's election could produce the two-thirds approval needed in 
the Senate as well after four failed attempts since 1989.

But an AP survey Wednesday found 35 senators on record as opposing the 
amendment - one more than the number needed to defeat it if all 100 
senators vote, barring a change in position.

Late Wednesday, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., revealed that she 
would vote against the measure. "I don't believe a constitutional 
amendment is the answer," Clinton, a possible presidential candidate in 
2008, said in a statement.

Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., remained undecided, a spokesman said.

The House debate fell along familiar lines over whether the amendment 
strengthened the Constitution or ran afoul of its free-speech 
protections.

Supporters said there was more public support than ever because of 
emotions following the 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and 
Washington. They said detractors are out of touch with public sentiment.

"Ask the men and women who stood on top of the Trade Center," said Rep. 
Randy (Duke) Cunningham, R-Calif. "Ask them and they will tell you: pass 
this amendment."

Critics accused the amendment's supporters of exploiting the attacks to 
trample the right to free speech.

"If the flag needs protection at all, it needs protection from members 
of Congress who value the symbol more than the freedoms that the flag 
represents." said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., whose district includes 
the site of the former World Trade Center.

The last time the Senate voted on the amendment the tally was 63 in 
favor and 37 against, four votes short of the two-thirds majority 
needed.

Now, with more than two dozen new members, a four-seat Republican gain 
in the last election and a public still stung by the terrorist attacks 
in 2001, activists on both sides say the Senate could be within a vote 
or two of passage.

But the amendment's prospects faded late Wednesday when Democratic Sens. 
Maria Cantwell of Washington and Mark Pryor of Arkansas revealed that 
they would oppose it.

Possible presidential contenders who have supported the amendment in the 
past include Evan Bayh, D-Ind., Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., 
Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., and John McCain, R-Ariz.

Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., a likely presidential candidate, has said he 
would oppose the amendment.

The proposed one-line amendment to the Constitution reads, "The Congress 
shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the 
United States." For the language to be added to the Constitution, it 
must be approved by two-thirds of those present in each chamber, then 
ratified within seven years by at least 38 state legislatures.

The amendment is designed to overturn a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling in 1989 
that flag burning is a protected free-speech right. That ruling threw 
out a 1968 federal statute as well as flag-protection laws in 48 states. 
The law was a response to anti-Vietnam War protesters setting fire to 
American flags at demonstrations.

The Senate could consider the measure as soon as next month.

---

Associated Press Writer Jim Abrams contributed to this report.

---

The amendments are S.J. Res 12 and H.J. Res 10.

 * Origin:  (1:226/600)