[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 125 (Thursday, September 11, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11409-S11410]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           OATH OF ALLEGIANCE

  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, earlier today, I talked about 
remembering September 11 and the terrible events that happened that 
day, but it also brought us together as we remembered what it means to 
be an American.
  This afternoon, I wish to address an important statement on what it 
means to be a citizen of the United States. I mean specifically the 
oath of allegiance which all new citizens swear in court when they are 
naturalized.
  I rise this afternoon to announce that I will shortly introduce 
legislation to make the current oath of allegiance

[[Page S11410]]

the law of the land. Doing so will give the oath of allegiance the same 
status enjoyed by other key symbols and statements of being American. 
The American Flag, the Pledge of Allegiance, the National Anthem, and 
our national motto--all these symbols and statements have been 
specifically approved by Congress and are now a matter of law.
  The oath of allegiance, which is currently a matter of mere Federal 
regulation, ought to be treated with the same dignity. I do this today 
because it has come to my attention that the Bureau of Citizenship and 
Immigration Services, or BCIS, an agency of the Department of Homeland 
Security, may be planning to change the oath of allegiance that 
immigrants take to become citizens of this Nation.
  According to National Review Online:

       The Federal Government is about to change the Oath of 
     Allegiance that immigrants take at citizenship ceremonies.

  The article goes on to say BCIS intends to announce the change, 
perhaps make it effective immediately, perhaps on September 17, 
Citizenship Day, or next week, during Constitution Week, which is the 
anniversary of the signing of the Constitution. I do not know whether 
that will happen or whether it will not happen, but I have read the new 
oath that, according to National Review Online, BCIS intends to make 
public next week.

  I prefer the oath we already have. The oath of allegiance is a 
fundamental statement on the commitment of becoming a U.S. citizen. It 
should not be altered by a Government agency, no matter how well 
intentioned. Any change should be subject to the approval of this body. 
It ought to be enshrined in law.
  In the first 5 months of this fiscal year, nearly 170,000 new 
Americans took the oath of allegiance and were naturalized as citizens 
of this country. The oath assumed its present form in the 1950s and was 
first adopted in Federal regulation in 1929, but some of the language 
dates all the way back to 1790.
  Let me describe how this oath is used in practice. Imagine that we 
are in a Federal courthouse, such as the one I was in in Nashville. It 
was October 2001. It was Naturalization Day. This happens at virtually 
every Federal courthouse virtually every month. The room is filled with 
anxious persons talking among themselves in halting English. They are 
obviously with their families and their closest friends. They are 
neatly dressed. Most faces are radiant.
  That day there were 77 persons from 22 countries who had passed their 
exams, learned English, passed a test about American Government, 
survived a character investigation, paid their taxes, and waited in 
line for 5 years to be a citizen of the United States of America.
  The bailiff shouts: ``God save this honorable court.'' On that day, 
the judge, her Honor Aleta Trauger, walked in. She asked each of the 
applicants to stand, to raise each one's right hand and repeat the 
following oath, which I am going to state. I hope those listening will 
listen carefully because this oath makes an impression:

       I--

  And then you state your name--

     hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely 
     renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any 
     foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or 
     which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I 
     will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the 
     United States of America against all enemies, foreign and 
     domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the 
     same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States, 
     when required by law; that I will perform noncombatant 
     service in the Armed Forces of the United States when 
     required by law; that I will perform work of national 
     importance under civilian direction when required by law; and 
     that I take this obligation freely without any mental 
     reservation or purpose of evasion, so help me God.

  Now, that is quite an oath. It has strength. It has clarity. It 
sounds as if it might have been written by a couple of rowdy patriots 
in Philadelphia or Williamsburg. Yet, surprisingly, Congress has never 
voted on the content of this oath of allegiance. We have left it to 
regulators.
  That is not how we treat other symbols of our Nation or other 
statements on what it means to be an American. For example, the 
American flag with its 50 stars--one for each State, 13 stripes for the 
original colonies--cannot be altered by Federal regulation. The only 
way a star gets added is when Congress acts to admit a new State, and 
we have never changed the 13 stripes since the flag was first adopted 
in 1777.

  The Pledge of Allegiance, which we repeat each morning in the Senate, 
cannot be altered by Federal regulation. The pledge is a statement of 
some of the values of the American creed: ``One nation under God, 
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.''
  What if a Federal agency decided we should take out the word 
``justice,'' and just say ``with liberty for all''? It cannot happen 
because the pledge can only be altered by an act of Congress, as it was 
in 1954 when the phrase ``under God'' was added.
  The national motto, ``In God We Trust,'' which appears on all of our 
coins and dollar bills, cannot be altered by Federal regulation. It is 
a fundamental statement of the religious character of the American 
people, even though we do not permit and do not want the establishment 
of a state religion.
  The Treasury Department cannot decide to leave ``In God We Trust'' 
off the next dollar bill it prints because the motto was adopted by 
Congress, at first in 1864 to be printed on the 2-cent piece, and later 
as the official national motto in 1956.
  The national anthem, ``The Star-Spangled Banner,'' cannot be changed 
by Federal regulation. It, too, is a statement of our values, declaring 
our country to be ``the land of the free and the home of the brave.''
  What if a Government agency decided it preferred ``America the 
Beautiful'' or ``The Battle Hymn of the Republic'' or the song we sang 
on the steps of the Capitol this morning, ``God Bless America,'' all of 
which are great songs? It cannot be done. The agency would have to ask 
Congress to act. Why? Because ``The Star-Spangled Banner'' was named 
our national anthem by law in 1931.
  Likewise, the oath of allegiance should not be altered lightly by a 
Government agency without public comment and without approval from 
Congress.
  Of the five symbols and statements I have described, the flag, the 
anthem, the pledge, the motto, and the oath of allegiance, only the 
oath of allegiance is legally binding on those who take it. New 
citizens must take it and they must sign it.
  Just to be clear, I have no objection to others proposing 
modifications to the oath of allegiance that we use today. I happen to 
like the present oath. It has strength. It has clarity. I have seen in 
the eyes of new Americans how much it means to them. Perhaps ways can 
be found to make it even stronger. Still, let us make sure any changes 
have the support of a people as represented by Congress.
  The oath of allegiance is a statement of the commitments required of 
new citizens. Current citizens, through their elected representatives, 
ought to have a say in what those commitments are. That is a lesson in 
democracy. A legally binding statement on an American citizen ought to 
reflect American values, including democracy.
  So as we remember the sobering events of September 11, we are also 
reminded of how our country came together as one nation in response to 
those events. Today, more than at any time in a generation, we 
understand and value what it means to be an American. We ought to 
protect in law the great statements of our citizenship, such as the 
oath of allegiance. If it should ever be revised, it should be done in 
an open and democratic manner. The people should have a chance to make 
their views known. Congress should vote. That is the American way.

                          ____________________