THAT THEY OWE THEIR FREEDOMS TO THOSE THAT HAVE FALLEN AND A
           PROMISE TO THE DHEAD THEIR COUNTRY HAS NOT FOREGOATEN THEM. IT
           IS NOT ONLY IN WAR THAT THIS SYMBOL HAS SERVED TO UNITE US. FEW
           WILL FORGET THE MOMENT WHEN NEIL ARMSTRONG AND BUZZ FLANTSED
           THE FLAG ON THE MOON. DHEM STRAILTED THAT WE ARE A NATION OF
           RESTLESS EXPLORERS, OF DREAMERS ALWAYS ALWAYS READY TO REACH
           FOR THE STARS. IT WAS A TESTIMONY TO THE HARD WORK, INGENUITY

           AND THE PIONEER SPIRIT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. I AM THEREFORE
           PROUD TO RISE TODAY TO INTRODUCE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT
           WILL RESTORE TO THE CONGRESS A RIGHT TO PROTECT OUR UNIQUE
           NATIONAL SYMBOL, THE AMERICAN FLAG, FROM ACTS OF PHYSICAL DES
           SCRAIGS. RESTORING LEGAL PROTECTION TO THE AMERICAN FLAG IS NOT
           NOR SHOULD IT BE A PARTISAN ISSUE. SENATORS BOTH REPUBLICANS
           AND DEMOCRATS HAVE JOINED 54 SENATORS BOTH REPUBLICANS AND
           DEMOCRATS HAVE JOINED WITH SENATOR CLELAND AND MYSELF AS
           ORIGINAL COSPONSORS OF THIS AMENDMENT. NOW SOME HAVE ARGUED

           THAT THIS AMENDMENT ACTUALLY VIOLATES THE AMERICAN PRINCIPLES.
           THEY CONTEND THAT PREVENTING THE PHYSICAL DES SCRAIGS OF THE
           FLAG ACTUALLY TRAM -- TRAMPLES ON IT RYE OF AMERICANS TO SPEAK
           FREELY. I DISAGREE. RESTORING LEGAL PROTECTION TO THE AMERICAN
           FLAG WOULD NOT INFRINGE ON FREE SPEECH. IF BURNING THE FLAG
           WERE THE ONLY MEANS OF EXPRESSING DISSATISFACTION WITH THE
           NATION'S POLICIES, THEN I, TOO, MIGHT OPPOSE THIS AMENDMENT.
           BUT WE LIVE IN A FREE AND OPEN SOCIETY. THOSE WHO WISH TO
           EXPRESS THEIR POLITICAL OPINIONS MAY DO SO IN THE MEDIA, IN

           NEWSPAPER EDITORIALS AND PEACEFUL DEMONSTRATIONS AND THROUGH
           THEIR POWER TO VOTE. CERTAINLY SMASHING THE DOORS -- SMASHING
           IN THE DOORS OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT MAY BE A WAY OF EXPRESSING
           ONE'S DISSATISFACTION WITH THE FOREIGN POLICY OBJECTIVES AND
           ONE MAY EVEN CONSIDER SUCH BEHAVIOR SPEECH. LOSS CAN BE A
           MEASURE OF PREVENTING SUCH ACTIONS IN LARGE PART BECAUSE THERE
           ARE PEACEFUL ALTERNATIVES THAT CAN BE POWERFUL. RIGHT HERE IN
           THE UNITED STATES SENATE WE PROHIBIT SPEECHES OR DEMONSTRATIONS

           OF ANY KIND EVEN THE SILENT DISPLAY OF SIGNS OR BARNES IN THE
           PUBLIC GALLERIES. AS A SOCIETY, WE CAN AND DO PLACE LIMITATIONS
           ON BOTH SPEECH AND CONDUCT. MOREOVER, CONTRARY TO THE CLAIMS OF
           SOME RESTORING LEGAL PROTECTION TO THE AMERICAN FLAG WOULD NOT
           OVERTURN OR OTHERWISE CONSTRICT THE FIRST AMENDMENT. RATHER IT
           WOULD MERELY OVERTURN AN INTERPRETATION OF THAT AMENDMENT BY
           THE SUPREME COURT IN WHICH THE COURT, BY THE NARROWEST OF
           MARGINS, HELD THAT FLAG BURNING WAS A FORM OF PROTECTED FREE
           SPEECH. I BELIEVE THE COURT'S MAJORITY HAD IT WRONG THAT ITS

           DECISION THROUGH IN THE FACE OF OVER 2 YEARS OF AMERICAN
           HISTORY. BURNING THE FLAG IS CONDUCT, CONDUCT FOR WHICH THERE
           EXISTS NUMEROUS PEACEFUL ALTERNATIVES AND CONDUCT WHICH MAY BE
           PROHIBITED. THE AMENDMENT SENATOR CLELAND AND I PROPOSE WOULD
           CORRECT THE SUPREME COURT'S ERROR AND RESTORE TO CONGRESS AND
           THE STATES THE POWER THEY HISTORICALLY HAD TO PROTECT THE
           AMERICAN FLAG FROM PHYSICAL ACTS OF DESECRATION. NOR WOULD
           RESTORING LEGAL PROTECTION TO THE AMERICAN FLAG PLACE US UPON A
           SLAIPRY SLOPE TO LIMIT OTHER FREEDOMS. THE FLAG IS UNIQUE AS

           OUR NATIONAL SYMBOL. THERE IS NO OTHER SYMBOL, NO OTHER OBJECT
           WHICH REPRESENTS OUR NATION AS DOES THE FLAG. ACCORDINGLY,
           THERE'S NO BASIS FOR CONCERN THAT THE PROTECTION WE SEEK FROM
           THE AMERICAN FLAG COULD BE EXTENDED TO COVER ANY OTHER OBJECT
           OR FORM OF POLITICAL EXPRESSION. FOR MANY YEARS OUR FLAG WAS
           PROTECTED BY FEDERAL LAW AND LAWS IN 48 STATES FROM ACTS OF
           PHYSICAL DESECRATION. NO ONE CAN SERIOUSLY ARGUE THAT FREEDOM
           OF SPEECH OR FREEDOM OF SPREPGS WAS DIMINISHED OR CURTAILED
           DURING THAT PERIOD. RESTORING THE PROTECTION OF LAW TO OUR FLAG

           WILL NOT PREVENT THE EXPRESSION IN NUMEROUS WAYS SAFEGUARDED. I
           WOULD NOTE THAT THE SEFERTS TO RESTORE LEGAL PROTECTION TO
           TOWER NATIONAL SIMPLE SBOL A MOVEMENT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
           IT HAS BEEN INITIATED BY GRASS-ROOTS AMERICANS, NUMEROUS CIVIC
           VETERANS' AND PATRIOTIC ORGANIZATIONS LED BY THE AMERICAN
           LEGION WORKING TO BUILD SUPPORT ACROSS THIS THAIGS FOR A
           CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO RESTORE THE HISTORICAL PROTECTION
           OF OUR FLAG. AND 46 STATES HAVE PASSED RESOLUTIONS URGING

           CONGRESS TO SEND A FLAG-PROTECTION AMENDMENT TO THE STATES FOR
           RATIFICATION. THAT'S NO SMALL SUPPORT, AND I BELIEVE WE NEED TO
           SUPPORT THEM. I THEREFORE THINK THAT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE
           SHOULD NOT BE FRUSTRATED BY THIS BODY. THIS RESOLUTION SHOULD
           BE ADOPTED AND THE FLAG AMENDMENT SENT TO THE STATES FOR THEIR
           APPROVAL. MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE TEXT
           OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT BE INCLUDED AT THE END OF MY REMARKS.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
           

           MR. HATCH: MR. PRESIDENT, I'M VERY HONORED TO BE A COSPONSOR
           WITH MY DEAR FRIEND FROM GEORGIA, SENATOR CLELAND. I APPRECIATE
           THE EFFORTS THAT HE'S PUTTING FORTH IN THIS BATTLE AND HAVING
           SERVED IN THE MILITARY AS HE HAS DONE WITH SUCH DISTINCTION AND
           WITH THE COURAGE AND HEROISM THAT HE'S HAD, I THINK WE OUGHT TO
           ALL LISTEN TO HIM. AND I FOR ONE WILL CERTAINLY DO SO AND AM
           PROUD AND PLEASED TO BE ABLE DO SO. SO I YIELD THE FLOOR TO MY

           COLLEAGUE. MR. CLELAND: MR. PRESIDENT?
           
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM
           
           MR. KENNEDY:.
           

           MR. KENNEDY: MR. PRESIDENT, I BELIEVE UNDER AGREEMENT, I WAS TO
           BE RECOGNIZED. I'D LIKE TO ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO BE ABLE TO
           YIELD TO THE SENATOR FROM GEORGIA FOR WHATEVER REMARKS AND THEN
           TO BE RECOGNIZED SUBSEQUENTLY.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
           

           MR. CLELAND: MR. PRESIDENT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I THANK
           THE SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS FOR YIELD AGO FEW MINUTES SO I
           CAN SPEAK TO THE POINT THAT HAS BEEN RAISED BY SENATOR HATCH,
           THE DISTINGUISHED JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN, ON THE
           CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT REGARDING OUR FLAG. MR. PRESIDENT, I
           AM A SUPPORTER OF A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PROHIBIT THE
           PHYSICAL DECRATION OF THEUNITED STATES FLAG. LIKE MANY
           AMERICANS, I WAS TROUBLED WHEN THE SUPREME COURT RULED IN TWO
           CASES -- TEXAS V. JOHNSON AND UNITED STATES V. ECKMAN, THAT

           STATUTES WERE VIOLATIONS TO FREE SPEECH. I RESPECTED THE WISDOM
           OF THE JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT, YET I WAS SADDENED THAT
           WE WERE NO LONGER ABLE TO RELY UPON STATUTORY AUTHORITY TO
           PROTECT THE FLAG. I WAS SADDENED IN LIGHT OF THE VIEWS
           EXPRESSED BY SUCH DISTINGUISHED PAST AND PRESENT SUPREME COURT
           JUSTICES. THESE JUSTICES HAVE EACH SUPPORTED THE SLTU NOTHING
           IN THE CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS THE STATES OR THE FEDERAL
           GOVERNMENT FROM PROTECTING THE FLAG. NONETHELESS, THE CURRENT
           SUPREME COURT VIEW STANDS. THE FLAG IS NOT A MERE SYMBOL. IT IS

           WHAT WE STAND FOR, IT IS WHAT WE BELIEVE N IT IS A SACRED PART
           OF OUR COUNTRY'S HISTORY. AND OUR COUNTRY'S RIGHT IN EVERY WAY.
           I DO NOT HAVE TO TELL THE SENATE WHAT THE FLAG ACTUALLY MEANS.
           JUST ASK THE SOLDIER WHO PROUDLY MARCHES BEHIND THE FLAG WHAT
           IT MEANS TO SALUTE THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES. ASK THE
           NEWLY-SWORN CITIZEN WHAT IT MEANS TO CLAIMT FLAG FOR HIS OR HER OWN?
           ASK THE WIDOW OF A SLANG SOLDIER. IT WAS ONLY A NATURAL THING
           THAT I BECOME A STUDENT OF THE CIVIL WAR. I POINT TO THE

           LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF CITATIONS GIVEN TO MEN IN BATTLE DURING
           THE CIVIL WAR FOR ACTS OF VALOR ASSOCIATED WITH THE FLAG.
           SOLDIERS WERE ROUTINELY AWARDED THE MEDAL OF VALOR. MANY OF
           THESE AWARDS WERE AWARDED. THESE BRAVE MEN KNEW THE MEANING OF
           THE FLAG. THE FLAG UNITES AMERICANS. EVERYWHERE HISTORY HAS
           BEEN MADE IN THIS COUNTRY, THE FLAG HAS BEEN PRESENT. IT WAS
           THE UNITED STATES FLAG THAT INSPIRED OUR NATIONAL AN THEFM IT
           WAS AN AMERICAN FLAG THAT WAS RAISED WHEN JESSE OWENS WAS IN
           GERMANY. IT WAS THE UNITED STATES FLAG THAT WAS HOISTED IN EWOE

           JIMA. IT WAS THE UNITED STATES FLAG THAT WAS PLANTED ON THE
           MOON. I STAND FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. THIS AMENDMENT IS
           VERY SIMPLE. IT INVESTS CONGRESS WITH THE AUTHORITY TO PROTECT
           THE FLAG FLEW STATUTE. WE NEED NOT FEAR THAT THE STATES WILL
           CREATE A HODGEPODGE OF PROTECTION STATUTES. ACCORDING TO
           OPINION SURVEYS, THREE OUST EVERY FOUR AMERICANS SUPPORT
           PROTECTING THE FLAG FROM DESECRATION. 49 STATES HAVE ENACTED
           RESOLUTIONS TO CALM ON THE CONGRESS TO PASS A FLAG PROTECTION
           AMENDMENT. THERE I LISTENED MY SUPPORT EFFORT TOS TO SEND THIS

           TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FOR RATIFICATION. THE HOUSE HAS TWICE
           PASSED RESOLUTIONS THAT WOULD BEGIN THE FORMAL PROCESS OF
           AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION TO PROTECT THE FLAG. THE SENATE HAS
           FAILED TO RESPOND TO THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY VIEW OF THE
           AMERICAN PEOPLE. I BELIEVE NOW IS AN IMPORTANT TIME TO
           REINFORCE OUR SUPPORT FOR THE AMERICAN FLAG. THE UNITED STATES
           IS UNQUESTIONABLY THE WORLD'S ONLY REMAINING SUPERPOWER. OUR
           LEADERSHIP SUN RIVALED. THE PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM
           AT THAT GUIDED OUR FOREFATHERS ARE SEEN AS SIGNING EXAMPLES FOR
           THE WORLD. EVERYWHERE THAT COMMUNISM HAS FAILED, WHERE
           DICTATORS HAVE BEEN OVERTHROWN PEOPLE LOOK TO AMERICA AND TO

           THE AMERICAN FLAG THAT LEADS OUR AMBASSADORS, TROOPS, CITIZENS,
           AND OUR HOPE AS WE LEND OUR SUPPORT AND LEADERSHIP TO THOSE
           NATIONS STRUGGLING TO OVERCOME THEIR PAST. MEEM SEEK ASYLUM
           LOOK FOR AN AMERICAN FLAG FLYING OVER OUR EMBASSIES TO GUIDE
           THEM TO A PLACE WHERE RIGHTS CAN BE PROTECTED. LESS US USE THIS
           OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW THE WORLD THAT WE REAFFIRM OUR COMMITMENTS
           TO THE IDEALS IT STANDS FOR. AS SUPREME COURT JUST CITIES
           STEVENS SAID IN HIS DISSENT FROM TEXAS V. JOHNSON, THE FREEDOMS
           OF EQUALITY AND TOLERANCE THAT THE FLAG EMBODIES HAVE MOTIVATED

           OUR NATION'S LEADERS AND ACTIVISTS TO EMERGENCY THEIR LIVES IN
           DEFENSE OF THIS COUNTRY. THE FLAG WHICH UNIQUELY SYMBOLIZES ITS
           POWER IS WORTHY OF -- THESE ARE POWERFUL WORDS. WISE WORDS,
           WORDS WE SHOULD ALL HEED. LET US ALL NOW STAND IN SUPPORT OF
           THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES
           TO STAND IN SUPPORT WITH US OF THIS RESOLUTION. I THANK THE

           SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS FOR THE TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
           

           MR. KENNEDY: MR. PRESIDENT, I'D ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE
           COMMENTS OF MY COLLEAGUES, THE SENATOR FROM UTAH AND THE
           SENATOR FROM GEORGIA, BE PLACED IN AN APPROPRIATE PLACE NLT
           RECORD, NOT TO INTERFERE WITH THE DISCUSSION.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
           

           MR. KENNEDY: MR. PRESIDENT, SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE
           QUESTIONED DR. SATCHER'S SUPPORT FOR CLINICAL TRIALS OF THE
           DRUG A.Z.T. IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES AS PART OF THE ALL-OUT
           INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH EFFORT TO HALT THE HUSH ROOMING
           EPIDEMIC OF MOTHER-TO-INFANT TRANSMISSION OF THE AIDS VIRUS.
           EVERY DAY MORE THAN 1,000 BABIES IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ARE
           BORN INFECTED WITH H.I.V.. CLING CAL TRIALS IN THE UNITED
           STATES IN 1994 SHOWED THAT IT'S POSSIBLE TO REDUCE THE

           MOTHER-TO-INFANT TRANSMISSION OF H.I.V. BY ADMINISTERING A.Z.T.
           DURING PREGNANCY, LAIRX AND DELIVERY. HOWEVER, IT'S RECOGNIZED
           THAT SUCH TREATMENT WOULD NOT BE FEASIBLE IN DEVELOPING
           COUNTRIES. SENATOR FRIST TALKED ABOUT THIS BRIEFLY IN HIS
           PRESENTATION. IT IS TOO EXPENSIVE AND IT REQUIRES ONGOING
           THERAPY WHICH IS NOT POSSIBLE IN REMOTE AREAS. THERE HAS TO BE
           AN ONGOING REGIME, ONGOING REGIME OF TREATMENT WHICH IS VERY,
           VERY DIFFICULT IN MANY OF THE PARTS OF AFRICA WHERE THERE'S

           HIGH CONCENTRATIONS OF THIS. IT ALSO PROHIBITS BREAST FEEDING
           WHICH IS THE NORM IN MOST OF THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES AND IN
           MOST OF THE -- JUST ABOUT ALL OF THE AFRICAN COUNTRIES. AND THE
           OBVIOUS ADVANTAGES IN BREAST FEEDING IS BECAUSE OF THE
           POLLUTION OF THE WATER RESOURCES, THAT WE HAVE ABOUT TEN
           MILLION CHIMPRY YEAR DIE FROM PREVENTABLE DISEASES IN THE WORLD

           BECAUSE OF BAD WATER. AND THE BREAST FEED SOMETHING A KEY
           ELEMENT IN TERMS OF THE SURVIVAL OF THE CHILDREN THAT DO IN
           MANY DIFFERENT CULTURES. SO, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT
           IN THE UTILIZATION OF THE REGIME THAT IS USED IN THIS COUNTRY
           WITH EXPECTED -- WITH EXPECTANT MOTHERS PROHIBITS BREAST
           FEEDING, SO YOU'RE DEALING WITH NOT ONLY A PROBLEM IF YOU WERE
           TO SUPERIMPOSE THE MODERN REGIMES THAT WE USE IN TERMS OF

           MOTHERS OF HIGHLY EXPENSIVE REGIMES, BUT YOU'RE ALSO DEALING
           WITH THE PROBLEMS CULTURALLY WITH THE BREAST FEEDING, WHICH IS
           VERY COMMON AND WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO UNRAVEL IF IT WAS
           WORTH UNRAVELING, AND SECONDLY IN TERMS OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO
           HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE INVOLVED IN THE PROGRAMS IN THESE THIRD
           WORLD COUNTRIES. FOR THESE REASONS, A GROUP OF INTERNATIONAL
           EXPERTS CONVENED BY THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION IN JUNE 1994

           RECOMMENDED THAT RESEARCH BE CARRIED OUT TO DEVELOP A SIMPLER,
           LESS COSTLY TREATMENT. THE IDEA WAS TO MAKE IT AFFORDABLE IN
           TERMS OF THE LIMITED RESOURCES FOR AFRICAN-AMERICANS AND ALSO
           THAT WOULD BE CULTURALLY SUITABLE IN TERMS OF THE BREAST
           FEEDING AND IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNTS OF TIMES THAT INDIVIDUALS
           WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK FOR ADDITIONAL KIND OF TREATMENT. THE

           IDEA WAS TO TAILOR THE REGIME TO THE EXISTING CULTURAL,
           ECONOMIC, AND SOCIAL REGIMES WHICH EXIST IN AREAS OF THE WORLD
           WHERE WE HAVE THE HIGH CONCENTRATIONS OF H.I.V. BUT RECOGNIZING
           THAT ONE OF THE VERY ENCOURAGING AREAS WITH REGARDS TO H.I.V.
           IS TRYING TO INTERCEPT THE PASSAGE OF THE H.I.V. INTO NEWBORN
           CHILDREN. THAT IS -- PRESENTS EFOR THAT MUST OPPORTUNITIES. IN

           A NUMBER OF INSTANCES, EVEN IF MOTHERS ARE INK EFFECTED, ON A
           NUMBER OF INSTANCES, THE CHILDREN ARE BORN WITHOUT T IN A
           NUMBER OF INSTANCES THEY ARE BORN WITH IT BUT AFTER A PERIOD OF
           TIME, FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER, THEY DEVELOP, SO THEY FREE
           THEMSELVES FROM THAT. IT IS A PHENOMENON THAT IS REALLY UNIQUE
           IN TERMS OF UNDERSTANDING THE HEALTH IMPLICATIONS OF H.I.V. AND
           RECOGNIZING THE POSSIBILITIES FOR TRYING TO REDUCE THE

           COMMUNICATION OF H.I.V. TO THESE INFANTS, THE CHALLENGE
{END: 1998/02/04 TIME: 14-30 , Wed.  105TH SENATE, SECOND SESSION}