[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 11674-11677]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  TO REAFFIRM THE REFERENCE TO ONE NATION UNDER GOD IN THE PLEDGE OF 
                               ALLEGIANCE

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under a previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to the consideration of S. 2690.
  The clerk will report the bill by title.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The bill (S. 2690) to reaffirm the reference to ``One 
     Nation Under God'' in the Pledge of Allegiance bill.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. At 3:20 this afternoon we will vote on a piece of 
legislation I introduced to reaffirm Congress' commitment to the Pledge 
of Allegiance and our national motto ``In God we trust.'' I hope my 
colleagues will join me in this reaffirmation. Many already have.
  I ask unanimous consent the list of 32 Senators as original 
cosponsors be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                     Original Cosponsors of S. 2690

       Mr. Sessions, Mr. Lott, Mr. Nichols, Mr. Burns, Ms. 
     Collins, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Helms, Mr. Inhoff.
       Mr. Campbell, Mr. Roberts, Mr. DeWine, Mr. McConnell, Mr. 
     Shelby, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Voinovich.
       Mr. Phil Gramm, Mr. George Allen, Mr. Ensign, Mr. Bob 
     Smith, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Lugar.
       Mr. Bond, Mr. Murkowski, Mr. Craig, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Crapo, 
     Mr. Brownback, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Zell Miller.

  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Yesterday's decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of 
Appeals in Newdow v. U.S. Congress was, in a word, outrageous. It is 
inexplicable that this man so seriously objected to his daughter having 
to listen and watch others recite the pledge at their school. Keep in 
mind, in this country no one can be forced to recite the Pledge of 
Allegiance. It is simply a matter of respect.
  It is appalling that this court took the time and judicial resources 
to resuscitate this case which the district court had already dismissed 
for failing to state a claim. This complaint was a mess. The plaintiff, 
Dr. Newdow, who represented himself, asked a Federal court to order the 
President to change a law. The court took great pains to find a claim 
in Mr. Newdow's complaint and then to rule in his favor.
  He did this at a time when Federal judicial resources are very 
strained. The Nation is trying to function in the speedy manner 
required by the sixth amendment, with 89 judicial vacancies, a 
staggering number, representing 10 percent of the Federal judiciary.
  According to the Judicial Conference, in the past three decades, a 
U.S. Courts of Appeals judges' average caseload increased by nearly 200 
percent. In light of these strained resources, it is appalling to me 
that the court took time to resuscitate this very flawed case.
  The Pledge of Allegiance plays a very important part in the 
citizenship experience of every American. It is part of the patriotic 
thread that weaves us all together in times of crisis and times of 
celebration.
  If the ninth circuit's interpretation of the establishment clause 
stands, many national ceremonies and celebrations will be negatively 
impacted. Singing of songs with references to God on government 
property will be prohibited. For example, songs such as ``Star Spangled 
Banner,'' ``God Bless America,'' and ``America the Beautiful,'' which 
Americans sing every Fourth of July on the steps of this building. But 
such references are not just important in ties of celebration. On 
September 11 we stood on the steps of the Capitol and sang ``God Bless 
America.'' Countless Americans uttered the phrase ``God Bless America'' 
and prayed together in public spaces. This ruling could prohibit that.
  Judge Ferdinand Fernandez wisely dissented from this decision. His 
words have been quoted before. He said it beautifully. Such phrases as 
``In God we trust'' or ``under God'' have no tendency to establish a 
religion in this country or to suppress anyone's exercise or 
nonexercise of religion. He went on, in eloquent terms, and defends his 
dissent.
  I believe this ruling will be soundly rejected. I was so pleased that 
yesterday the majority leader and the minority leader moved the Senate 
very quickly in expressing its disapproval

[[Page 11675]]

immediately following the ruling yesterday. The Ninth Circuit is not 
unfamiliar with going out on a limb, and the Supreme Court is not 
unfamiliar with striking it down. This circuit is the most overturned 
circuit in the country.
  There is certainly nothing wrong with pushing the envelope and using 
an original interpretation on novel issues of law, but this court 
repeatedly makes rulings which countervail standing precedent. Instead 
of administering justice, it seems some judges in the ninth circuit are 
far more interested in making social policy statements. It is not what 
the Constitution asks them to do and it is not what the American people 
pay them for.
  The first amendment prohibits Congress from passing any law 
establishing a religion. Coming as they did from a land with an 
established religion where those of other faiths were not well 
tolerated, they set the highest value on freedom of religion. But they 
were not advocating freedom from religion.
  By passing this legislation today the Senate will make clear that we 
understand the Founders' intention. We will reiterate our support for 
the Pledge of Allegiance as codified and our national motto, ``In God 
we trust.''
  Finally, I commend the Judiciary Committee today in voting out the 
nomination of Lavenski Smith to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. 
Lavenski Smith, who is from the State of Arkansas will make an 
outstanding jurist on the Federal bench. He is supremely well qualified 
as a former member of the Arkansas Supreme Court. He understands the 
proper role of the judiciary.
  I applaud the committee's unanimous vote today. I believe if we did 
not have the vacancies on the Federal bench to the extent that we now 
have them, the decision from the Ninth Circuit would not have occurred. 
In Judge Smith's confirmation hearings last month, he expressed his 
unshakable respect for an adherence to precedent. He said even when it 
goes against his personal beliefs, he would follow precedence. Clearly, 
we need people like Lavenski Smith on the bench.
  I am pleased that the Judiciary Committee has taken this step. I am 
also pleased that the Senate will, today, make clear to the Federal 
judiciary, our reaffirmation of our Pledge of Allegiance and our 
national motto ``In God we trust.''
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator 
Zell Miller be added as an original cosponsor on the bill on which we 
are about to vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for 
the quorum call be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam President, I would like to speak in support of 
the legislation proposed by Senator Hutchinson from Arkansas. I am a 
cosponsor and helped draft this legislation. I would say this: This is 
not an itty-bitty issue. This is a big issue. The Congress and States 
and cities have been expressing a desire to have, and be allowed to 
have, an expression of faith in the public life of America. The courts 
have been on a trend for decades now to constrict that.
  The opinion out of the Ninth Circuit is not as aberrational as some 
would think. The Supreme Court, in my view, has been inconsistent and 
unclear. It has cracked down on some very small instances of public 
expression of faith. Our courts have made decisions such as 
constraining a valedictorian's address at a high school. Certainly our 
prayer in schools has been rigorously constricted or eliminated in any 
kind of normal classroom setting, as has the prayer at football games.
  I will just say we hope the courts will reconsider some of their 
interpretations of the establishment clause and the free exercise 
clause of the first amendment and help heal the hurt in this country.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The hour of 3:20 has arrived.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I wish to announce this will be a final 
rollcall vote of the day and the week. Our next rollcall vote will 
occur Tuesday morning following the July Fourth recess. Senators should 
be on notice that we will have a vote that morning and votes throughout 
the day and the week.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read 
the third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the 
question is, Shall the bill pass?
  The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. 
Helms) is necessarily absent.
  I further announce that if present and voting the Senator from North 
Carolina (Mr. Helms) would vote ``yea.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 99, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 166 Leg.]

                                YEAS--99

     Akaka
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Cantwell
     Carnahan
     Carper
     Chafee
     Cleland
     Clinton
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Helms
       
  The bill (S. 2690) was passed, as follows:

                                S. 2690

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) On November 11, 1620, prior to embarking for the shores 
     of America, the Pilgrims signed the Mayflower Compact that 
     declared: ``Having undertaken, for the Glory of God and the 
     advancement of the Christian Faith and honor of our King and 
     country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern 
     parts of Virginia,''.
       (2) On July 4, 1776, America's Founding Fathers, after 
     appealing to the ``Laws of Nature, and of Nature's God'' to 
     justify their separation from Great Britain, then declared: 
     ``We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are 
     created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with 
     certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, 
     Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness''.
       (3) In 1781, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the 
     Declaration of Independence and later the Nation's third 
     President, in his work titled ``Notes on the State of 
     Virginia'' wrote: ``God who gave us life gave us liberty. And 
     can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have 
     removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of 
     the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God. That 
     they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I 
     tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that 
     his justice cannot sleep forever.''.

[[Page 11676]]

       (4) On May 14, 1787, George Washington, as President of the 
     Constitutional Convention, rose to admonish and exhort the 
     delegates and declared: ``If to please the people we offer 
     what we ourselves disapprove, how can we afterward defend our 
     work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the 
     honest can repair; the event is in the hand of God!''.
       (5) On July 21, 1789, on the same day that it approved the 
     Establishment Clause concerning religion, the First Congress 
     of the United States also passed the Northwest Ordinance, 
     providing for a territorial government for lands northwest of 
     the Ohio River, which declared: ``Religion, morality, and 
     knowledge, being necessary to good government and the 
     happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education 
     shall forever be encouraged.''.
       (6) On September 25, 1789, the First Congress unanimously 
     approved a resolution calling on President George Washington 
     to proclaim a National Day of Thanksgiving for the people of 
     the United States by declaring, ``a day of public 
     thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging, 
     with grateful hearts, the many signal favors of Almighty God, 
     especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to 
     establish a constitution of government for their safety and 
     happiness.''.
       (7) On November 19, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln 
     delivered his Gettysburg Address on the site of the battle 
     and declared: ``It is rather for us to be here dedicated to 
     the great task remaining before us--that from these honored 
     dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they 
     gave the last full measure of devotion--that we here highly 
     resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain--that 
     this Nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--
     and that Government of the people, by the people, for the 
     people, shall not perish from the earth.''.
       (8) On April 28, 1952, in the decision of the Supreme Court 
     of the United States in Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 
     (1952), in which school children were allowed to be excused 
     from public schools for religious observances and education, 
     Justice William O. Douglas, in writing for the Court stated: 
     ``The First Amendment, however, does not say that in every 
     and all respects there shall be a separation of Church and 
     State. Rather, it studiously defines the manner, the specific 
     ways, in which there shall be no concern or union or 
     dependency one on the other. That is the common sense of the 
     matter. Otherwise the State and religion would be aliens to 
     each other--hostile, suspicious, and even unfriendly. 
     Churches could not be required to pay even property taxes. 
     Municipalities would not be permitted to render police or 
     fire protection to religious groups. Policemen who helped 
     parishioners into their places of worship would violate the 
     Constitution. Prayers in our legislative halls; the appeals 
     to the Almighty in the messages of the Chief Executive; the 
     proclamations making Thanksgiving Day a holiday; `so help me 
     God' in our courtroom oaths--these and all other references 
     to the Almighty that run through our laws, our public 
     rituals, our ceremonies would be flouting the First 
     Amendment. A fastidious atheist or agnostic could even object 
     to the supplication with which the Court opens each session: 
     `God save the United States and this Honorable Court.'''.
       (9) On June 15, 1954, Congress passed and President 
     Eisenhower signed into law a statute amending the Pledge of 
     Allegiance to read: ``I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the 
     United States of America and to the Republic for which it 
     stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and 
     justice for all.''.
       (10) On July 20, 1956, Congress proclaimed that the 
     national motto of the United States is ``In God We Trust'', 
     and that motto is inscribed above the main door of the 
     Senate, behind the Chair of the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives, and on the currency of the United States.
       (11) On June 17, 1963, in the decision of the Supreme Court 
     of the United States in Abington School District v. Schempp, 
     374 U.S. 203 (1963), in which compulsory school prayer was 
     held unconstitutional, Justices Goldberg and Harlan, 
     concurring in the decision, stated: ``But untutored devotion 
     to the concept of neutrality can lead to invocation or 
     approval of results which partake not simply of that 
     noninterference and noninvolvement with the religious which 
     the Constitution commands, but of a brooding and pervasive 
     devotion to the secular and a passive, or even active, 
     hostility to the religious. Such results are not only not 
     compelled by the Constitution, but, it seems to me, are 
     prohibited by it. Neither government nor this Court can or 
     should ignore the significance of the fact that a vast 
     portion of our people believe in and worship God and that 
     many of our legal, political, and personal values derive 
     historically from religious teachings. Government must 
     inevitably take cognizance of the existence of religion and, 
     indeed, under certain circumstances the First Amendment may 
     require that it do so.''.
       (12) On March 5, 1984, in the decision of the Supreme Court 
     of the United States in Lynch v. Donelly, 465 U.S. 668 
     (1984), in which a city government's display of a nativity 
     scene was held to be constitutional, Chief Justice Burger, 
     writing for the Court, stated: ``There is an unbroken history 
     of official acknowledgment by all three branches of 
     government of the role of religion in American life from at 
     least 1789. . . [E]xamples of reference to our religious 
     heritage are found in the statutorily prescribed national 
     motto `In God We Trust' (36 U.S.C. 186), which Congress and 
     the President mandated for our currency, see (31 U.S.C. 
     5112(d)(1) (1982 ed.)), and in the language `One Nation under 
     God', as part of the Pledge of Allegiance to the American 
     flag. That pledge is recited by many thousands of public 
     school children--and adults--every year... Art galleries 
     supported by public revenues display religious paintings of 
     the 15th and 16th centuries, predominantly inspired by one 
     religious faith. The National Gallery in Washington, 
     maintained with Government support, for example, has long 
     exhibited masterpieces with religious messages, notably the 
     Last Supper, and paintings depicting the Birth of Christ, the 
     Crucifixion, and the Resurrection, among many others with 
     explicit Christian themes and messages. The very chamber in 
     which oral arguments on this case were heard is decorated 
     with a notable and permanent--not seasonal--symbol of 
     religion: Moses with the Ten Commandments. Congress has long 
     provided chapels in the Capitol for religious worship and 
     meditation.''.
       (13) On June 4, 1985, in the decision of the Supreme Court 
     of the United States in Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 
     (1985), in which a mandatory moment of silence to be used for 
     meditation or voluntary prayer was held unconstitutional, 
     Justice O'Connor, concurring in the judgment and addressing 
     the contention that the Court's holding would render the 
     Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional because Congress 
     amended it in 1954 to add the words ``under God,'' stated 
     ``In my view, the words `under God' in the Pledge, as 
     codified at (36 U.S.C. 172), serve as an acknowledgment of 
     religion with `the legitimate secular purposes of solemnizing 
     public occasions, [and] expressing confidence in the 
     future.'''.
       (14) On November 20, 1992, the United States Court of 
     Appeals for the 7th Circuit, in Sherman v. Community 
     Consolidated School District 21, 980 F.2d 437 (7th Cir. 
     1992), held that a school district's policy for voluntary 
     recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance including the words 
     ``under God'' was constitutional.
       (15) The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals erroneously held, in 
     Newdow v. U.S. Congress, (9th Cir. June 26, 2002) that the 
     Pledge of Allegiance's use of the express religious reference 
     ``under God'' violates the First Amendment to the 
     Constitution, and that, therefore, a school district's policy 
     and practice of teacher-led voluntary recitations of the 
     Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional.
       (16) The erroneous rationale of the 9th Circuit Court of 
     Appeals in Newdow would lead to the absurd result that the 
     Constitution's use of the express religious reference ``Year 
     of our Lord'' in Article VII violates the First Amendment to 
     the Constitution, and that, therefore, a school district's 
     policy and practice of teacher-led voluntary recitations of 
     the Constitution itself would be unconstitutional.

     SEC. 2. ONE NATION UNDER GOD.

       (a) Reaffirmation.--Section 4 of title 4, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 4. Pledge of allegiance to the flag; manner of 
       delivery

       ``The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag: `I pledge 
     allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and 
     to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, 
     indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.', should be 
     rendered by standing at attention facing the flag with the 
     right hand over the heart. When not in uniform men should 
     remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at 
     the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Persons in 
     uniform should remain silent, face the flag, and render the 
     military salute.''.
       (b) Codification.--In codifying this subsection, the Office 
     of the Law Revision Council shall make no change in section 
     4, title 4, United States Code, but shall show in the 
     historical and statutory notes that the 107th Congress 
     reaffirmed the exact language that has appeared in the Pledge 
     for decades.

     SEC. 3. REAFFIRMING THAT GOD REMAINS IN OUR MOTTO.

       (a) Reaffirmation.--Section 302 of title 36, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 302. National motto

       ```In God we trust' is the national motto.''.
       (b) Codification.--In codifying this subsection, the Office 
     of the Law Revision Council shall make no change in section 
     302, title 36, United States Code, but shall show in the 
     historical and statutory notes that the 107th Congress 
     reaffirmed the exact language that has appeared in the Motto 
     for decades.

  Mr. DASCHLE. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. LOTT. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

[[Page 11677]]



                          ____________________