English Only Gets Hearing in Congress

From: MMBelanger@aol.com
Date: Thu Nov 02 1995 - 21:11:08 EST


Received: (news@localhost) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.6.8/940311.01ccg) id VAA06027 for nifl-esl@novel.nifl.gov; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 21:11:09 -0500
Path: literacy.nifl.gov!nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
From: MMBelanger@aol.com
Newsgroups: nifl.esl
Subject: English Only Gets Hearing in Congress
Date: 2 Nov 1995 21:11:08 -0500
Organization: National Institute for Literacy
Lines: 82
Sender: listproc@literacy.nifl.gov
Distribution: nifl
Message-ID: <951102203107_80398693@emout05.mail.aol.com>
Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
Apparently-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
Status: RO
X-Status: 

My name is Maurice Belanger, new subscriber to this list.  I work for the
National Immigration Forum.  In the past, the Forum had a project to monitor
the English Only movement.  Unfortunately, with so many other things going on
in Congress, the issue cannot be a priority for us.  Nevertheless, I do try
to keep tabs on what is going on , and here is my summary of the hearing that
was held a couple weeks ago, giving the opportunity for members of Congress
who have English Only proposals pending to make there case.  The summary was
originally done for members of the National Immigration Forum:


Hearing on English Only Held in House

The House Subcommittee on Childhood, Youth and Families of the Economic and
Educational Opportunities Committee held a hearing on the issue of English as
the "official" language of the U.S.  The Committee is Chaired by Rep. Randy
Cunningham (R-CA).  The hearing did not focus on any specific bill, and
witnesses were limited to members of Congress testifying in two panels.

The first panel consisted of members who have pending legislation on the
issue:

Rep. Bill Emerson (R-MO), whose Language of Government Act (H.R. 123) is the
principle piece of legislation advancing the English Only cause in this
Congress with more than 180 co-sponsors testified first.  Emerson's bill
would make English the official language of government, directing that the
government "shall conduct it's official business in English.  It gives
citizens the right to bring a lawsuit against the government if they feel
they are being denied the right to be served by the Government in English.
 Rep. Emerson said that in the last 15-20 years, the federal government has
established "official multi-lingualism."  As an example, he cited a GAO study
which found that "hundreds" of government documents are printed in a language
other than English.  Committee member Dale Kildee (D-MI) pointed out that the
GAO found that 265 out of 400,000 government documents were printed in other
languages, or approximately  6/100 of 1 percent.

Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), who has sponsored the Senate version of the
Language of Government Act (S. 175).  He said that legislating Official
English does nothing more than help people assimilate.  The bill contains no
provision to provide resources to help people learn English.

Rep. Toby Roth (R-WI), whose Declaration of Official Language Act (H.R. 739)
would make English the Official language and would declare English to be "the
preferred language of communication among citizens.  The bill would preempt
any State or Federal law that is inconsistent, and would repeal bilingual
education and bilingual ballots.  Roth stated that without Official English,
the country is in danger of experiencing "linguistic apartheid."

Rep. Peter King (R-NY), whose National Language Act (H.R. 1005) would declare
English to be the official language of the U.S., and would terminate
bilingual education and bilingual ballots.  He repeatedly talked about
children in New York who were being "forced" into bilingual education
programs.

Rep. Jose Serrano (D-NY), whose English Plus Resolution (HCR 83) would state
a sense of the Congress that the government pursue strategies that encourage
all Americans to become proficient in English and to learn another language.
 He questioned assertions by proponents of English Only that immigrants are
"refusing" to learn English by pointing out that English classes in cities
across the U.S. are full.

It was clear by their questions that members of the Subcommittee Republican
and Democrat are very skeptical of the need for English Only legislation.
 Members of the Subcommittee acknowledged that English is the common language
of the U.S., but didn't see the need to legislate it.  None found evidence
that the U.S. was splitting apart by language groups.  Rep. Patsy Mink
(D-HI), disputed the assertion that making English official would "unify" the
country, saying that she doesn't feel a particular bond to others who speak
English.  Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) noted that it is no coincidence that the
various English Only proposals are gaining  prominence at a time when there
is "shameful immigrant bashing" going on in this country.

In a second panel of members of Congress, Rep. Sonny Bono (R-CA) testified in
favor of English Only.   In his characteristically thoughtful manner, Bono
said, "We'll learn the language faster if we speak English Only.  Enough is
enough with this bleeding heart stuff."

Another hearing was held on November first, with mostly advocates of English
Only testifying.  I did not attend, but will try to sumarize  from the
written statements at some point.

Maurice Belanger
MMBelanger@aol.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 11 2000 - 13:21:41 EST