House Again Approves Ban on Burning American Flag

WASHINGTON —  For the second time in two years, the House approved by a lopsided margin a popular but controversial proposal that would amend the Constitution to outlaw burning the U.S. flag.

Despite the 310-114 vote, comfortably more than the two-thirds required for constitutional amendments, proponents of the measure admitted that they face an uphill struggle against Americans who consider torching Old Glory a form of protected free speech.

“If we can just pick up three extra votes in the Senate, then we’ll be on our way,” Rep. Gerald B.H. Solomon (R-N.Y.) told a supportive group of veterans and other amendment supporters. “We are going to hold off [sending the measure to the Senate] until we have time to activate the grass roots across the nation” to pressure undecided or opposing senators.

“We’ve got until next spring, if necessary,” he added. “Nothing is going to happen this year.”

The House vote represented the third time that Congress has set out to overturn a 1989 Supreme Court decision protecting flag burning as a form of free speech. Congress approved a flag-burning resolution in 1989, but federal judges in Seattle and Washington ruled the measure unconstitutional. The latest attempt came after the Republicans won control of Congress in 1995 but fell three votes short in the Senate.

In Thursday’s vote, 100 Democrats joined 210 Republicans in voting for the proposal. Voting against were 100 Democrats, 13 Republicans and an Independent.

A White House statement issued this week called the proposal “misguided.”

“Congress should be deeply reluctant to tamper with the 1st Amendment,” the statement said.

Although it is not clear that the proposal will succeed now where it has failed before, Republicans consider the issue important in illustrating the ideological differences between their conservative agenda and that of the Democrats.

Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), who led the Senate push for the amendment two years ago, is expected to offer a measure identical to the House-passed proposal.

If Congress passes the measure, two-thirds of the nation’s state legislatures would have to ratify it before the Constitution would be amended. Proponents said that, if they manage to get the measure through Congress, their chances of ultimate success will be much improved because support is stronger for the proposal in state legislatures.

Advocates for the amendment said public opinion polls have indicated that more than 80% of the nation’s voters support an amendment outlawing flag burning.

“Let the American people decide,” Solomon said during his floor speech in support of the amendment. “Even if you’re opposed to this amendment, give the people the opportunity to decide.”

Rep. Charles T. Canady (R-Fla.), a sponsor of the proposal, said the measure would not truly intrude on people’s rights. “This amendment recognizes that there are limits to what can be done under the banner of freedom of expression, and it recognizes that the American people want a line drawn at this point,” Canady said.

Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, argued that flag burning is not protected speech.

“It is an act of contempt,” he said. “Flag burning is no more free speech than a child’s temper tantrum.”

But opponents, such as Rep. Gary L. Ackerman (D-N.Y.), argued that changing the Constitution for a narrow issue like flag burning would do more harm than good.

“Some of us have mistaken the flag as a religious icon to be worshiped,” he said. “They would diminish our Constitution by changing it needlessly.”

He added that he would hate to see the flag burned in protest but that such behavior poses no danger to the nation.