[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 98 (Monday, July 24, 2006)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1503-E1504]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     PLEDGE PROTECTION ACT OF 2005

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. BETTY McCOLLUM

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 19, 2006

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2389) to 
     amend title 28, United States Code, with respect to the 
     jurisdiction of Federal courts over certain cases and 
     controversies involving the Pledge of Allegiance:

  Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my 
opposition to H.R. 2389, the Pledge Protection Act of 2005. This 
legislation does nothing to address the real issues facing families in 
America today, and serves merely to distract and delay Congress from 
efforts to vote on issues that would actually impact the daily lives of 
our constituents.
  This bill failed to pass out of the Judiciary Committee, and yet, we 
are voting on it today on the Floor of the People's House, an event 
without precedence according to the Parliamentarian. The Majority is 
taking this extraordinary action not for an issue that will affect the 
daily lives of American families--but for a blatantly political debate 
in an election-year attempt to appeal to their base. My constituents 
are concerned about the conflict in the Middle

[[Page E1504]]

East, earning a living wage, accessing affordable health care and 
relief from sky-rocketing gas prices. Minnesotans in the 4th District 
have made it clear that Congress should get to work on the priority 
issues of this country, rather than continue to play political games.
  H.R. 2389 would remove the Pledge of Allegiance from the jurisdiction 
of federal courts. This bill is an attempt by Republicans to strip our 
federal courts of their power to rule over issues of Constitutional 
relevance, and to tell our federal courts that their expertise on 
Constitutional freedoms is irrelevant. Our system of checks and 
balances was constructed by our Founders for this specific reason--to 
retain the independence of the Courts, and their ability to rule justly 
and uphold the rule of law in this great country. As Justice Sandra Day 
O'Connor stated last year, the effectiveness of the federal courts 
relies on the knowledge that they will not be subject to retaliation 
for their rulings.
  Representative Mel Watt offered an amendment today to this bill that, 
had it passed, would have allowed the Supreme Court to hear cases 
regarding the Pledge of Allegiance--in effect, reversing the negative 
damage this bill will inflict if it passes. I supported Mr. Watt's 
amendment, and am extremely disappointed that the majority of my 
colleagues did not do the same.
  This bill is likely unconstitutional and debating it on the floor of 
the House today is an outrage considering the real issues facing 
American families. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this 
legislation, upholding the system of justice our Founders intended, and 
return to debating the issues we were elected to resolve.

                          ____________________