The Daily Background

Flag burning amendment? Oh man, Newsweek’s John Alter kills it.

I inherited my one litmus test from my father, Jim Alter, who flew 33 harrowing missions over Nazi Germany during World War II. My father is not just a veteran who by all odds should not have survived. He is a true patriot. His litmus test is the proposal to amend the Constitution to ban flag burning, which will come up for a vote next week in the U.S. Senate. For dad—and me—any member of Congress who supports amending the Bill of Rights for the first time in the history of this country for a nonproblem like flag burning is showing serious disrespect for our Constitution and for the values for which brave Americans gave their lives. Such disrespect is a much more serious threat than the random idiots who once every decade or so try (often unsuccessfully) to burn a flag.

[…]
Our understandable outrage at flag burning shouldn’t turn our brains to mush. “I feel the same sense of outrage, but I would not amend that great shield of democracy [the Constitution] to hammer a few miscreants,” Colin Powell said when the issue last came up (his position has not changed). “The flag will be flying proudly long after they have slunk away.” Powell argues that a constitutional ban on flag burning is a sign of weakness and fear. Note: The other countries that have banned flag burning include Cuba, China, Iran and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

Alter later notes that according to one count, only 45 big flag burning incidents have occurred in the 200 years of American history (and less than 12 since 1989). I’d also like to note that the constitutionality of flag burning has been brought before the United States Supreme Court not once, but several times (and this issue has come up in Congress as well several times). And the act of burning a flag has not been viewed by the court as unconstitutional.

The definitive and most recent case (again, in 1989), the Texas V. Johnson was an appeal by the state of Texas, trying to overrule an earlier state-level acquittal of the defendant who had burned an American flag. Esquilax summarizes the results of the court battle:

…the Supreme Court upheld a Texas court decision that Gregory Johnson’s conviction for flag desecration was unconstitutional. Importantly, the Supreme Court here determined:

-What Gregory Johnson did (burn the flag) was expressive conduct, protected by the Constitution
-Johnson’s actions did not constitute “fighting words,”
[…]
- and made the famous quote: “If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.”

Now, I don’t have the slightest interest in burning any flags; American or otherwise. And I can understand that the act it is considered extremely offensive by some people, and can certainly identify with many of those feelings.

However.

It is important to note two things. Firstly, as decided by the Supreme Court, flag burning is an act of freedom of expression protected under the most sacred document we as Americans have; the U.S. Constitution. To ban it under the same document would be a veritable desecration of that document, no better than say the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 which prohibited criticism of the federal government.

Incidentally, the acts expired in 1801 and were never renewed, thank God, although some provisions are suspiciously similar to what the current White House Administration has claimed it has the executive power to do, such as to imprison people indefinitely without trial. But enough about that. Back to this more burning topic. No pun intended.

The point is that by limiting freedom of expression by banning it under the U.S. Constitution is no less than an assault on the Constitution itself by degrading its integrity with such contradicting and fundamentally un-American drivel.

And let’s not forget the second issue as well. This is being used entirely as a Republican election-year stunt designed specifically to garner support from their conservative base in the November midterms. That’s what it is, 100%. And they’re extremely open about it. Nobody is pretending that this is anything else. Nobody is pretended (unlike the ‘horror’ of gay marriage), that this is a burning problem for America right now. Again, no pun intended. Nobody is suggesting that this is a serious problem that is facing Americans right now. Even the Republican base understands this blatant pandering (and frankly appreciates it, no less).

Where are the victims of these ubiquitous flag burnings that these Republicans are supposedly representing on Capitol Hill? There are none. Which brings me to the real outrage of this. Congress should be representing the victims of a criminally low federal minimum wage of $5.15 which hasn’t been raised in 9 years– under which, minimum wage workers are actually below the poverty line. And the victims of an immoral health care system under which only the rich can afford to get comprehensive health care. Or the victims of this war in Iraq. The victims of these crimes are everywhere, in every state, and every city in America.

The Amendment banning flag burning has already passed the Republican-dominated House of Representatives. It is expected to come up in the Senate (where it needs 2/3ds majority to pass), and everybody thinks it’s going to be close. We’ll be watching.

Filed under: oh six midterm Elections, Z-TDB Blog