Constitutional Amendment Authorizing Congress to Prohibit Physical Desecration of the Flag of the United States

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AUTHORIZING CONGRESS TO PROHIBIT PHYSICAL DESECRATION OF THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES -- (House of Representatives - June 22, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.J. Res. 10, the proposed constitutional amendment to prohibit the physical desecration of our flag. And, in this respect, I take no pleasure in doing so: Like the vast majority of Americans, I too condemn those malcontents who would desecrate our flag--a universal symbol for democracy, freedom and liberty--to grab attention for themselves and inflame the passions of patriotic Americans. Without doubt, those misfits who desecrate our flag deserve our contempt.

Further, I fully appreciate and respect the motivations of those who offer and support this amendment, particularly the patriotic men and women who so faithfully served this Nation in our armed services and in other capacities. Their strong feelings on this issue should neither be questioned nor underestimated. They deserve our respect.

However, I respectfully disagree with them and will oppose this amendment for the reasons so eloquently articulated by Senator MITCH MCCONNELL of Kentucky. In opposing a similar amendment a few years ago, Senator MCCONNELL stated that it ``rips the fabric of our Constitution at its very center: the First Amendment.'' He added, ``Our respect and reverence for the flag should not provoke us to damage our Constitution, even in the name of patriotism.''

Those of us who oppose this amendment do so not to countenance the actions of a few, but because we believe the question before us today is how we the United States of America--are to deal with individuals who dishonor our Nation in this manner.

I submit, Mr. Speaker, that a constitutional amendment is neither the appropriate nor best method for dealing with these malcontents. As the late Justice Brennan wrote for the Supreme Court in Texas v. Johnson: ``The way to preserve the flag's special role is not to punish those who feel differently about these matters. It is to persuade them that they are wrong. ..... We can imagine no more appropriate response to burning a flag than waving one's own.''

Furthermore, it troubles me that this amendment, if approved, would ensconce the vile actions of a few provocateurs into the very document that guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom to petition the government. That document, of course, is our Constitution.

In more than 200 years, our Constitution has been amended only 27 times, and nearly all of those amendments guarantee or expand rights, liberties and freedoms. Only one amendment--prohibition--constricted freedoms and soon was repealed.

I simply do not believe that our traditions, our values, our democratic principles--all embodied in our Constitution and the Bill of Rights--should be overridden to prohibit this particular manner of speech, even though I completely disagree with it.

Free speech is often a double-edged sword. However, if we value the freedoms that define us as Americans, we should refrain from amending the Constitution to limit those same freedoms to avoid being offended.

I remind my colleagues that if we approve this amendment, we put our great Nation in the company of the oppressive regimes in China, Iran, and Cuba--all of whom have similar laws protecting their flags. Needless to say, when it comes to free speech, the United States of America is the world's leader. It does not follow China, Iran or Cuba.

Our flag is far more than a piece of cloth, a few stripes, 50 stars. Our flag is a universal symbol for freedom, liberty, human rights and decency that is recognized throughout the world. The inflammatory actions of a few misfits cannot extinguish those ideals. We can only do that ourselves. And I submit that a constitutional amendment to restrict speech--even speech such as this--is the surest way to stoke the embers of those who will push for even more restrictions.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov