Today the Senate voted on and narrowly defeated the flag burning amendment to the US Constitution.

Flag-Burning Amendment Fails In Senate

constitutional amendment to ban flag desecration died in a Senate cliffhanger Tuesday, a single vote short of the support needed to send it to the states for ratification a week before Independence Day.

The 66-34 vote in favor of the amendment was one less than the two-thirds required. The House surpassed that threshold last year, 286-130.

Now right off the bat I am shocked.  There was much more support for it then I anticipated.  I excpected this to fail mostly on party lines, but instead it only failed by a single vote.  Obviously some Senators crossed the party lines somewhere. 

Voting "yes" were 52 Republicans and 14 Democrats.  I will post a roll call list below, but  notable (to me) were Sen Feinstein and Sen Reid who both voted yes.  I am not a big fan of Diane, so I am somewhat bemused by her vote.  Harry howver, I am just not a big fan.  Period.

The proposed amendment, sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, read: "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States."

It represented Congress’ response to Supreme Court rulings in 1989 and 1990 that burning and other desecrations of the flag are protected as free speech by the First Amendment to the Constitution.

Senate supporters said the flag amounts to a national monument in cloth that represents freedom and the sacrifice of American troops

"Countless men and women have died defending that flag," said Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., closing two days of debate. "It is but a small humble act for us to defend it."

Opponents said the amendment would violate the First Amendment right to free speech. And some Democrats complained that majority Republicans were exploiting people’s patriotism for political advantage in the midterm elections.

Apparently they missed the fact that 14 of their brethren agreed with the Republicans.

"Our country’s unique because our dissidents have a voice," said Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, a World War II veteran who lost an arm in the war and was decorated with the Medal of Honor.

"While I take offense at disrespect to the flag," he said, "I nonetheless believe it is my continued duty as a veteran, as an American citizen, and as a United States senator to defend the constitutional right of protesters to use the flag in nonviolent speech."

The Senate also rejected an alternative put forward by assistant Democratic leader Dick Durbin of Illinois. It would have made it against the law to damage the flag on federal land or with the intent of breaching the peace or intimidation. It also would have prohibited unapproved demonstrations at military funerals.

Well, there I agree.  I don’t think a fiuneral is the place to protest.

Let me say for the record, I personally do not support an amendment to the constitution for this.  Any time the USC is used to restrict actions and rights, I consider it a bad thing, in general.

Now, having said that, I have to acknowledge, as some senators must have, that this is a hot issue with fairly stroing public support.  A local poll showed 50% in favor of it.  So what does that mean?  It clearly means the issue is not going to go away.

As a vet, I am personally irritated by disrespect to the flag, but that is the effect of 12 years of institutional respect more then anything, I think.  At home, I display my flag proudly and will continue to do so till I drop, but I recognize that others do not share my passion.  I am ok with it. 

Burn yours all day long but touch mine and meet the fist of death.

So as much as I hate people that disrespect the flag, the SCOTUS has made it clear it is free speech and while I disagree, I have to allow it it protected.

As I have said before, no speech is really free unless it pisses you off.

But all that aside, I think we will see this amendment again, soon, and they will find the one holdout vote.

Alabama: Sessions (R) Yes; Shelby (R) Yes.

Alaska: Murkowski (R) Yes; Stevens (R) Yes.

Arizona: Kyl (R) Yes; McCain (R) Yes.

Arkansas: Lincoln (D) Yes; Pryor (D) No.

California: Boxer (D) No; Feinstein (D) Yes.

Colorado: Allard (R) Yes; Salazar (D) Yes.

Connecticut: Dodd (D) No; Lieberman (D) No.

Delaware: Biden (D) No; Carper (D) No.

Florida: Martinez (R) Yes; Nelson (D) Yes.

Georgia: Chambliss (R) Yes; Isakson (R) Yes.

Hawaii: Akaka (D) No; Inouye (D) No.

Idaho: Craig (R) Yes; Crapo (R) Yes.

Illinois: Durbin (D) No; Obama (D) No.

Indiana: Bayh (D) Yes; Lugar (R) Yes.

Iowa: Grassley (R) Yes; Harkin (D) No.

Kansas: Brownback (R) Yes; Roberts (R) Yes.

Kentucky: Bunning (R) Yes; McConnell (R) No.

Louisiana: Landrieu (D) Yes; Vitter (R) Yes.

Maine: Collins (R) Yes; Snowe (R) Yes.

Maryland: Mikulski (D) No; Sarbanes (D) No.

Massachusetts: Kennedy (D) No; Kerry (D) No.

Michigan: Levin (D) No; Stabenow (D) Yes.

Minnesota: Coleman (R) Yes; Dayton (D) Yes.

Mississippi: Cochran (R) Yes; Lott (R) Yes.

Missouri: Bond (R) Yes; Talent (R) Yes.

Montana: Baucus (D) Yes; Burns (R) Yes.

Nebraska: Hagel (R) Yes; Nelson (D) Yes.

Nevada: Ensign (R) Yes; Reid (D) Yes.

New Hampshire: Gregg (R) Yes; Sununu (R) Yes.

New Jersey: Lautenberg (D) No; Menendez (D) Yes.

New Mexico: Bingaman (D) No; Domenici (R) Yes.

New York: Clinton (D) No; Schumer (D) No.

North Carolina: Burr (R) Yes; Dole (R) Yes.

North Dakota: Conrad (D) No; Dorgan (D) No.

Ohio: DeWine (R) Yes; Voinovich (R) Yes.

Oklahoma: Coburn (R) Yes; Inhofe (R) Yes.

Oregon: Smith (R) Yes; Wyden (D) No.

Pennsylvania: Santorum (R) Yes; Specter (R) Yes.

Rhode Island: Chafee (R) No; Reed (D) No.

South Carolina: DeMint (R) Yes; Graham (R) Yes.

South Dakota: Johnson (D) Yes; Thune (R) Yes.

Tennessee: Alexander (R) Yes; Frist (R) Yes.

Texas: Cornyn (R) Yes; Hutchison (R) Yes.

Utah: Bennett (R) No; Hatch (R) Yes.

Vermont: Jeffords (I) No; Leahy (D) No.

Virginia: Allen (R) Yes; Warner (R) Yes.

Washington: Cantwell (D) No; Murray (D) No.

West Virginia: Byrd (D) No; Rockefeller (D) Yes.

Wisconsin: Feingold (D) No; Kohl (D) No.

Wyoming: Enzi (R) Yes; Thomas (R) Yes.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS