Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, July 4, 1990 TAG: 9007050183
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-8 EDITION: HOLIDAY
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Whether or not flag-burning "constitutes no threat to the nation," as you wrote, it is a sensitive, deeply felt issue of considerable symbolic importance and concern to many thousands of Americans.
While the proposed constitutional amendment failed to win the required two-thirds vote in either the House or Senate, it is worth remembering that the proposal earned a majority in both houses.
And while you choose to depict both votes as having a "party slant," I would point out that 38 Senate Republicans and 20 Senate Democrats voted in favor of the amendment. Four of Virginia's five House Democrats also supported the measure.
I also take offense at your insinuation that those who voted in line with your own view on this issue are "true patriots" while the rest of us are "of the sunshine variety." As one who loves his country, served in its military forces in World War II and the Korean War, and has had the privilege of public service as secretary of the Navy and now on the Senate Armed Services Committee, I leave that judgment to your readers and, indeed, to all Virginians.
I favored the constitutional-amendment process because it would involve not only Congress but also approximately 7,400 state legislators, and thus expand the element of "grassroots consultation." I would have preferred to let all Americans speak on this issue, not just members of Congress and editorial writers.
Finally, as for the flag debate and vote having "debased" the Senate and its members: Many issues before the Congress are of vital importance to some, but strike others as irrelevant. Some - not I, of course - might have questioned the need for federal legislation known as the Newspaper Preservation Act of 1970. JOHN WARNER United States Senate WASHINGTON, D.C.
by CNB