Senate Rejects Flag-Burning Amendment

WASHINGTON —  The Senate on Thursday rejected a constitutional amendment to outlaw flag burning that President Bush had endorsed in the wake of a controversial Supreme Court ruling.

The 51-48 vote in favor of the President’s proposal fell far short of the two-thirds majority needed to initiate a constitutional change and appeared likely to bury the issue for the time being.

Congress already has approved a statutory ban on flag burning that was supported by lawmakers who oppose a constitutional change. Bush said last Friday that he would allow the law to go into effect without signing it.

The White House shrugged off the defeat of the constitutional change Thursday, saying only that Bush was disappointed by the outcome of the campaign that he had begun with a burst of public relations activity last summer.

The flag issue became a political firestorm after the Supreme Court struck down a Texas law against flag burning in June. But the President’s allies in the Senate said that the issue has since lost much of its political appeal.

Opponents picked up 14 more votes than necessary to defeat the amendment--including 11 Repub lican senators--with arguments that the statutory ban passed by Congress would protect the flag adequately without tampering with the Bill of Rights.

“We can support the American flag without changing the American Constitution,” said Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell of Maine, who denounced the proposed constitutional amendment as unnecessary and unwise.

But Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole of Kansas termed the outcome “a loss for the American people” and said that the flag flying over the Capitol should be lowered to half-staff in mourning.

The proposed amendment was supported by 33 Republicans and 18 Democrats; 37 Democrats and 11 Republicans voted against it. Sen. Pete Wilson (R-Calif.) was absent. An aide to Wilson, a Republican candidate for governor of California, said Wilson was in San Francisco observing earthquake clean-up activities.

Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.) also traveled to California to observe the earthquake damage but returned Thursday and voted against the constitutional amendment.

Dole suggested that political opponents would try to exploit the flag issue against senators who voted against the proposed constitutional change and charged that Democrats had blocked the amendment by making it a partisan cause.

But he criticized the Administration’s lobbying effort as inadequate, noting that its three-line statement of support for the proposal would not take up a lot of space in the Congressional Record.

That modest statement contrasts with an earlier White House public relations blitz. On June 30, for example, the President went to the Iwo Jima Memorial to commemorate the flag-raising on the Pacific island during World War II as part of the pro-amendment campaign.

But, as it became increasingly apparent that the proposal was doomed, Bush lowered his voice.

“The silence from the White House over the past few days on this issue has been deafening,” Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) said.

Kennedy said the proposal should have been called the “Bush-Atwater Amendment” because the President gave it his blessing after a luncheon with Republican National Chairman Lee Atwater.

“(Bush) has used his high office for a low purpose,” Kennedy said.

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) disagreed. “It is not accurate to say that this is a partisan matter being engineered for crass political purposes when 18 Democrats have supported it,” he said.

Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has said that the Senate would have voted overwhelmingly for a constitutional change in the first days or weeks after the Supreme Court’s ruling.

On June 21, the high court reversed the conviction of Gregory Lee Johnson for torching a flag during the 1984 Republican convention in Dallas on grounds that his action was symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment.

Supporters of the statutory ban approved by Congress contend it has a better chance of being upheld than the Texas law because it prohibits flag desecration regardless of motivation. The Texas law prohibited flag burning only if a jury considered such action offensive in nature.

Prompt action by the House and Senate to approve the statutory ban appeared to cool passions of both the public and the lawmakers, Biden noted.

Four of the Republicans who were original co-sponsors of the proposed amendment changed their minds and voted against it: Sens. John C. Danforth of Missouri, Warren B. Rudman of New Hampshire, William S. Cohen of Maine and Slade Gorton of Washington.

Danforth, among others, said he was opposed to the proposal because it would narrow the free speech provisions of the First Amendment for the first time in 200 years.

A leading conservative, Sen. Gordon J. Humphrey (R-N.H.), also cast his vote against the amendment, declaring that the Senate had put aside polls and political considerations “to do what’s right for posterity.”

In his statement, Humphrey added: “One would think that America was aflame with burning flags, when nothing could be further from the truth.”

Cranston said that the 48 senators who voted against the amendment showed political courage, and others cautioned that it might be costly at the polls later.

Although the Senate vote effectively killed the amendment for the time being, the House is expected to vote on the proposal before the end of the year.

It takes a two-thirds approval by both chambers, plus ratification by three-fourths of the states, to adopt an amendment to the Constitution.

Staff writer James Gerstenzang contributed to this story.

SENATE VOTE ON FLAG AMENDMENT

WASHINGTON--Here is the 51-48 roll call by which the Senate failed to muster the necessary two-thirds vote to approve an amendment to the Constitution protecting the American flag against desecration:

Democrats for--Bentsen (Tex.); Breaux (La.); Bryan (Nev.); Burdick (N. D.); Byrd (W. Va); DeConcini (Ariz.); Dixon (Ill.); Exon (Neb.); Ford (Ky.); Fowler (Ga.); Heflin (Ala.); Hollings (S. C.); Johnston (La.); Nunn (Ga.); Reid (Nev.); Robb (Va.); Rockefeller (W. Va.); Shelby (Ala.).

Republicans for--Armstrong (Colo.); Bond (Mo.); Boschwitz (Minn.); Burns (Mont.); Coats (Ind.); Cochran (Miss.); D’Amato (N. Y.); Dole (Kan.); Domenici (N. M.); Garn (Utah); Gramm (Tex.); Grassley (Iowa); Hatch (Utah); Heinz (Pa.); Helms (N. C.); Kassebaum (Kan.); Kasten (Wis.); Lott (Miss.); Lugar (Ind.); Mack (Fla.); McCain (Ariz.); McClure (Ida.); McConnell (Ky.); Murkowski (Alaska); Nickles (Okla.); Pressler (S. D.); Roth (Del.); Simpson (Wyo.); Stevens (Alaska); Symms (Ida.); Thurmond (S. C.); Wallop (Wyo.); Warner (Va.).

Democrats against--Adams (Wash.); Baucus (Mont.); Biden (Del.); Bingaman (N. M.); Boren (Okla.); Bradley (N. J.); Bumpers (Ark.); Conrad (N. D.); Cranston (Calif.); Daschle (S. D.); Dodd (Conn.); Glenn (Ohio); Gore (Tenn.); Graham (Fla.); Harkin (Iowa); Inouye (Hawaii); Kennedy (Mass.); Kerrey (Neb.); Kerry (Mass.); Kohl (Wis.); Lautenberg (N. J.); Leahy (Vt.); Levin (Mich.); Lieberman (Conn.); Matsunaga (Hawaii); Metzenbaum (Ohio); Mikulski (Md.); Mitchell (Me.); Moynihan (N. Y.); Pell (R. I.); Pryor (Ark.); Riegle (Mich.); Sanford (N. C.); Sarbanes (Md.); Sasser (Tenn.); Simon (Ill.); Wirth (Colo.).

Republicans against--Chafee (R. I.); Cohen (Me.); Danforth (Mo.); Durenberger (Minn.); Gorton (Wash.); Hatfield (Ore.); Humphrey (N. H.); Jeffords (Vt.); Packwood (Ore.); Rudman (N. H.); Specter (Pa.).

Not voting--Wilson (R-Calif.).