Bennett still firmly against flag bill
But don't expect Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, to budge from his opposition toward GOP Sen. Orrin Hatch's mission to get the amendment passed.
Supporters want the amendment approved so Congress can move forward to debate an actual flag desecration ban, while critics caution against its passage. Opponents say Congress is close to changing the Constitution to fix a nonexistent problem and little is known about where the amendment could lead if approved.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to take up Hatch's constitutional amendment on flag desecration Thursday while Bennett's own bill on handling the problem still waits for a hearing. The issue is one of the few times the Republicans representing Utah disagree, and neither has changed his mind since the Senate's last vote on the amendment in 2000. Then the amendment failed to get the necessary two-thirds majority in a 63-37 vote. A new floor vote could take place before the end of the month.
Terri Schroeder, a senior lobbyist with the American Civil Liberties Union, who opposes the amendment, said the vote is "dangerously close." She said if all 100 senators are present and voting, the amendment will only fail by one vote as long as no one switches their stance.
"There aren't very many bills that have 58 upfront cosponsors, so anybody who says that this is some little nit-picky thing, they're crazy," Hatch said. "We have the votes if they were permitted to vote their conscience."
The amendment needs 67 votes to pass but Hatch said some Democrats will "pull back" and not vote the way they really feel.
The pending amendment does not ban flag desecration outright but amends the Constitution to give Congress the power to ban the physical desecration of the U.S. flag.
Hatch and the amendment's supporters say a 5-4 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1989 took away Congress' power to protect the flag. The ruling said banning flag desecration was unconstitutional under the First Amendment and struck down state laws prohibiting it.
Congress passed the Flag Protection Act in 1989 but the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional when applied to a burning of the flag in the context of a public protest.
Hatch emphasizes that the amendment "restores the Constitution to what it was" before the Supreme Court decision. "The amendment doesn't force you to ban anything," he said.
You can be the first to comment on this story.