Senate panel OKs Hatch amendment
The Senate Judiciary Committee, which Hatch chairs, endorsed his amendment on an 11-7 vote Tuesday and sent it to the full Senate. Hatch earlier pushed it through that panel's Constitution subcommittee on a slim 5-4 vote. The House passed it 300-125 last year.
Ratification requires passing both houses by two-thirds majorities and then adoption by three-fourths of the state legislatures.
Hatch predicts a tough battle in the full Senate, but expressed high hopes for the elusive victory he has sought since 1989 when the Supreme Court ruled flag burning is a protected form of free speech.
"I think we really have an opportunity to get the 67 votes necessary to pass the constitutional amendment," Hatch said. "We have a number of new Democrats and Republicans in the Senate, and I believe the odds are that we may be able to get the votes necessary."
Hatch has come within three votes of passage twice. One Republican Hatch has never won over is Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah. He was one of four Republicans who voted against the amendment the last time the Senate considered it in 2000. Had Hatch won their support, it would have passed. The House has passed it five times.
Bennett told the Senate in 2000 that if Hatch's amendment ever passes, "The words will lie there. I don't think they will make much difference (to stop flag burners), but they will be there as a symbol of our willingness to overturn more than 200 years of tradition with respect to individual rights as outlined in the First Amendment."
Many Democrats on the Judiciary Committee expressed similar sentiments Tuesday.
"Whatever the political cost, I will defend the right of Americans to express their views about their government, however hateful or spiteful or disrespectful they may be, without fear of their government putting them in jail," said Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., ranking Democrat on the committee, said the amendment amounts to trying to teach a lesson, punishable by law, on how to treat the flag. "That may be necessary in Saddam Hussein's Iraq or in Stalin's Soviet Union or in Castro's Cuba but not in America," he said.
Hatch said, "I don't consider defecating or urinating on the flag as examples of (protected) First Amendment speech. I consider it conduct. I think the vast majority of Americans do as well."
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., added, "We don't say you can't speak against the flag. We say you can't desecrate the flag."
Feingold predicted Hatch lacks the votes to win in the full Senate, "so this is a political exercise in an election year." Leahy agreed, saying, "The Constitution is being misused for partisan purposes."
Hatch bristled at that charge. "I do particularly resent the comments that this is just a political exercise because there are a lot of sincere people who believe that a constitutional amendment is the only way to redeem this situation. And it is bipartisan."
Hatch's top cosponsor, for example, is Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.
Of note, Sen. John Edwards, the Democratic vice presidential nominee and a committee member, did not attend the meeting Tuesday, but Leahy cast his vote by proxy against the amendment.
E-mail: lee@desnews.com
Comments
- Normal fire season predicted 5:50 p.m.
- Kids coping parents' addictions 5:35 p.m.
- Utah Co. man arrest in sex assault 5:30 p.m.
- S.Salt Lake mayor vetoes funding 5:29 p.m.
- Blazers offer Millsap 4-year deal 5:02 p.m.
- Eagle Mountain gets 5th well 4:44 p.m.
- Utah eligible for federal flu grants 4:05 p.m.
- Attempted murder case refiled 4:05 p.m.
- Cannon sued over unpaid bills 4:04 p.m.
- Women lose court bid to ski jump 4:02 p.m.
- LDS seminary principal arrested
- Jazz talking Boozer trade?
- Reactions on Boozer speculation
- Stadium of Fire flag burning was fake
- Jazz in back of line for free agents
- A primer for the 6th Potter film
- Okur signs two-year extension
- Jazz won't meet Lopez on Europe trip
- Restaurant destroyed by fire
- Mall owner seeks to retain zoning
- Bronco collecting a galaxy of recruits
141 - Letters: Palin mistreated
141 - Teachers struggle with district cuts
137 - LDS seminary principal arrested
135 - Jazz talking Boozer trade?
134 - Blazers may offer Millsap a contract
123 - Stadium of Fire flag burning was fake
91 - Moon landing: Let's hear from you
83 - Fairness of BCS debated
81 - Chaffetz eyes challenging Bennett
74
As more and more dads are put out of work in this economy, I've been...
The photographs are mysterious, brooding, dark. They show dimples and...
I would wear more than a face mask to go in there, full body bio hazard suit!
Demonrats and taxes are coming for you next.
I like Milsap a whole lot but we should let hime go. That is a lot of money...
I hate to lose Paul. He plays the game the way it should be played. Humble,...
Any tax on any one hurts us all.
Either way Portland dominates the Jazz with ease next year! Go Blazers!!!
A good guide for the average person, but for even the average fan, this stuff...
re: Lee | 4:31 a.m. July 10, 2009 What exactly is the diferrence between...
I think this should be a restructuring year for the jazz. Let's use this year...
Thank you McKay for this much much needed article. I have been a member of...


You can be the first to comment on this story.