'Official English' Bill Reveals Fear of Diversity

Members of the House of Representatives sent a message to the nation before they left to campaign for re-election: We only represent English-speaking Americans.

The xenophobic House passed the "English Empowerment Act" by a vote of 259-169 and thereby declared English the official language of the federal government.

In doing so, our elected representatives ignored America's early history. The Articles of Confederation were printed in both English and German because of the large German-speaking populations in the newly formed states. This English-only bill would not have allowed such an accommodation for its constituents.

The bill (H.R. 123) prohibits federal agencies from using foreign languages to conduct government business with its own citizens -- but it does allow government officials to speak those languages when dealing with foreign governments or for international trade.

American citizens who pay taxes and support our government, but are native speakers of other languages, are not as important to the federal government as foreign dignitaries or commerce. That's the message the U.S. House sent.

The vote was a victory for paternalistic government and for cultural divisiveness.

Father Government will force immigrants and their children to learn English immediately or suffer the consequences.

One would think that House members would be embarrassed to use the word "empowerment'' when they really mean "coercion.'' Perhaps our representatives don't speak English that well.

More accurately, call H.R. 123 the "English Coercion Act.''

Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, who voted for the bill, was quoted by the Ron Hutcheson of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram as saying, "We need to try to help people learn English as quickly as possible.''

Translated, Barton's statement means if your first language is Spanish or Korean or one of the other 326 languages present in America and you have learned enough English to buy groceries and find work but you cannot get through a Social Security or a tax form -- tough, you won't get assistance from the federal government.

It takes quite a degree of sophistication in English to understand the bureaucratic language of federal income tax laws and Social Security information briefs. Even people fluent in English struggle through these forms.

In many circumstances this bill asks too much of adults who immigrate here and become citizens and contribute their creativity and work to our nation but need help translating official documents so they can partake of the full socio-political status of any citizen. It punishes them for being born and educated in another country.

It denies them services for which they have paid as taxpaying citizens.

The Catch-22 in this coercive bill: The Immigration and Naturalization Service would not be allowed to print materials in foreign languages so that those who arrive on our shores may be able to understand what is required of them.

If the government employs someone who speaks Vietnamese as well as English, then that official, in his or her capacity, should help the government communicate its requirements to those who have come here from Vietnam. Information pamphlets written in Vietnamese save time and confusion. It seems logical. It seems necessary to our greater sense of community and national identity.

What is the government's job if not to aid its citizens and those who seek citizenship to become fully informed about the nation's laws, responsibilities, and benefits?

The English-only bill would repeal sections of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The bilingual election requirements would be dropped. Bilingual ballots would disappear. Voting on complex amendments would be impossible for those with just a limited knowledge of English.

This is the politics of exclusion. The English-only bill builds walls. It is punitive.

One would think that those who come to America from other countries are dividing the nation linguistically. Not so.

According to 1990 U.S. Census Bureau figures, more than 97 percent of Americans over 5 years old speak English well or very well. This entire controversy has been generated because of 4.8 million Americans who don't speak English well -- out of a total population of 251 million.

The "English Coercion Act'' says, in effect, America cannot be bothered to accommodate less than 5 million non-English speaking residents. It says we should not give them pamphlets in their languages about fair housing laws, anti-discrimination laws, or any other federal laws that might be important to their lives.

Supporters of the bill say that to print government information in Spanish and Chinese, but not in Turkish discriminates against those who came here from Turkey. And that is true.

Is it better then to discriminate against all non-English speakers? Is that less discriminatory?

If the concern is language education for those 4.8 million who do not speak English well, then the government can lead a thrust toward funding more English as a Second Language classes in our urban centers and in rural states. Similar programs can be pushed into elementary and secondary schools.

To go further, the government should be promoting programs to teach other languages to English-only speakers -- beginning in the elementary schools, so some fluency is gained in another tongue. And students can learn another way to understand the world.

This English-only bill merely supports a misguided nationalism. It doesn't represent the best of our heritage, that which reaches out and encompasses and celebrates our diversity.

Charles Levendosky is the editorial page editor for the Casper (Wyo.) Star-Tribune. His e-mail address is levendos@trib.com.

Last change: Aug 26, 1996

To share your thoughts about this article or any other in LatinoLink, send email to latino@latinolink.com. Please indicate whether your words are for publication. Gracias!