Reaffirming "In God We Trust" as the Official Motto of the United States

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Although the American people are concerned about restoring our economy and creating jobs, today we are returning to irrelevant issues that do nothing to promote economic growth and put Americans back to work. We have seen this before.

In the 107th Congress, we passed a bill to reaffirm the phrase ``One Nation, under God'' in the Pledge of Allegiance, and reaffirm the national motto. We went so far as to reenact into law, word for word, the existing law making ``In God We Trust'' the national motto, just to be sure.

Now, no one has threatened it. No one has said it was not the national motto. This resolution today, which has no force of law, simply restates the national motto--once again.

Why have my Republican friends returned to an irrelevant agenda? Irrelevant because it does nothing. It simply restates existing law that no one has questioned. Why are we debating nonbinding resolutions about the national motto?

The American people are demanding action on the President's jobs legislation. They are demanding that we
pay attention to rebuilding our national infrastructure. They are demanding that we deal with a budget fairly and effectively. They are demanding fairness for the middle class and for the 99 percent of Americans who don't write million-dollar checks and hire expensive lobbyists and make huge campaign contributions.

And yet here we are, back to irrelevant issue debates, the kind of thing people do when they have run out of ideas, when they have run out of excuses, when they have nothing to offer a middle class that is hurting and that has run out of patience.

What happened to Republican pledges that we weren't going to do these kind of symbolic resolutions anymore? Symbolic because, after all, it changes nothing. The national motto remains the national motto, as much today and tomorrow as yesterday. What happened to Republican pledges that we were going to focus on the business of legislating? That was earlier this year.

Make no mistake about it: Some have taken a decidedly divisive tone when discussing the national motto. Some have sought to imply that their political adversaries, including the President, are somehow less godly, or less patriotic, and have used the national motto as a political wedge to drive home that point, or to try to drive home that point.

I think that kind of divisiveness undermines national unity which, especially in times like these, is very important. Rather than trying to one-up each other over who can be the better or more godly American, we should be working together to solve our very real problems.

Mr. Speaker, let's get back to the work we were sent here to do. Let's stop playing the kind of social issue games that do nothing to move the Nation forward. The national motto is not in danger. No one here is suggesting that we get rid of it. It appears on our money. It appears in this Chamber above your head. It appears in the Capitol Visitor Center, all over the place. We don't need to go looking for imagined problems to fix. We've got enough real ones to worry about.

This resolution is a waste of time, a waste of effort. And again, remember that this country is a country for all people--whether they are religious or not, whether they believe in God or not, whether they believe in one God or not. The First Amendment tells us we should make no law respecting establishment of religion nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This is not an establishment of religion, but simply restating this when no one has threatened it, when no one has questioned it. It is an exercise to tell people who may not believe in God: You don't really count; you're not really Americans.

The establishment clause is there to protect religion from government, and government from religion, to separate the two.

This resolution is here to say we don't want to separate the two. If someone was threatening the national motto then maybe it would be necessary. As it is, this is simply an exercise in saying we're more religious than the other people. We're more godly than the other people. And by the way, let's waste time and divert people's attention from the real issues that we're not dealing with, like unemployment. We shouldn't go looking for imagined problems to fix when we have enough real ones to worry about.

I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Nobody said that the national motto ``In God We Trust'' is just words. Nobody said any such thing. What I said is that this resolution is just words because no one is threatening the national motto. It's there. It's on our currency, and it's on our walls. It's there. It's our national motto. No one denies that fact. Nothing will change when we pass this resolution. It was our national motto yesterday, it's our national motto today, and it will be our national motto tomorrow.

This resolution is simply words designed to distract attention from our real problems to a nonexistent problem. There's no challenge to our national motto. There is no challenge to the foundations of this country. There is a challenge to our economy, and that we ought to be paying attention to.

So all the nice words that my friend from Virginia talked about how important our belief in God is, I agree, obviously. But this resolution is a waste of time and a diversion.

I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would point out that the lawsuit that the gentleman from California referred to lost at the Supreme Court, and that was a number of years ago, which adds to the point that, of course, ``In God We Trust,'' our national motto, is not under attack or under threat, nor is ``under God'' in the Pledge of Allegiance under attack or under threat. And this is, in fact, an unnecessary resolution.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I've listened to this discussion. There's no question that most people in this Chamber, maybe everybody in this Chamber, agrees with the phrase, with the motto, ``In God We Trust.'' I certainly do.

It's no question it's the motto of this country. We've adopted it. It's no question that it's not threatened. No one's seeking to change it, except for every so often there's a court case which uniformly gets thrown out, and that's not new.

There's no necessity for this resolution except, really, the only reason for this resolution, frankly, is to declare how good we are, that we're going to reaffirm what needs no reaffirmation, and to divert attention from the issues that we really ought to be dealing with.

So let me say, again, ``In God We Trust'' is the motto of the United States. It was yesterday, it is today, it will be tomorrow whether we pass this resolution or not.

We do have to be sensitive to the fact that not everyone in this country believes in God, and they are just as much Americans as those of us who do believe in God.

I see no reason for passing this resolution to reaffirm what is already the case and what we've affirmed before. So it's a waste of time. And I am not saying that ``In God We Trust'' is a waste of time, nor that the national motto is simply words or a symbol. They mean something.

But this resolution is simply words which does nothing, is intended to do nothing other than to get up and say, we're godly, we're good people. And it's true, we are, I hope. Most of us are. But we don't have to declare it. And we don't have to make people who may not agree with it feel that they're not as American as we are.

We don't have to spend the time in this House when we're not spending it on things that are important in terms of something that we can actually change, that we can actually do something about, like creating jobs and affecting the economy. We can't change this. This is the national motto. It will remain the national motto. This resolution changes nothing.

If this resolution were saying, let's abolish the national motto, then it would change something and we'd say, well, you can debate it one way or the other. But this changes nothing. It simply diverts attention, it wastes our time, and it is unworthy for that reason.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FORBES. Mr. Speaker, in closing, the gentleman from New York says that we are simply declaring how good we are, that we are wasting our time, that we have other things that are important.

I realize that there are some who don't see the difference between what we're doing in reaffirming ``In God We Trust'' as our national motto from naming a post office or commending some athletic team that's won the last sports contest. But I happen to believe that when Thomas Jefferson stated in the Declaration of Independence that our rights came from God, he didn't think that was irrelevant or not important.

Mr. Speaker, I hope that we will support this resolution.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source