Thread: Sensenbrenner backs keeping bilingual ballots

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=420938

Sensenbrenner backs keeping bilingual ballots
Immigration fire feeds on mandate extension
By CRAIG GILBERT
cgilbert@journalsentinel.com
Posted: May 4, 2006
Washington - As a key figure in the push to renew the Voting Rights Act, Republican Jim Sensenbrenner is championing a provision that has drawn fire from some fellow conservatives in Congress: bilingual ballots.

Under the landmark, decades-old voting law, some communities that have non-English speaking minorities must print their ballots in two or more languages.

More than 50 House Republicans signed a letter earlier this year opposing the requirements, saying they "encourage the linguistic division of our nation" and contradict the "Melting Pot" ideal.

Some local officials have also complained about the cost.

A supervisor from Orange County, Calif., told a House subcommittee Thursday that the requirements are burdensome and are also "creating an anti-immigrant backlash."

But there is broad support in Congress to re-authorize the voting rights law, including the language provisions that have been in effect since the 1970s. Those supporters include Sensenbrenner, who in the past has endorsed bills to make English the "official language" of the U.S. government.

"I have always said that English is the language of commerce and people who came from countries where English is not the first language, if they want to achieve the American dream, had better learn how to speak and function in English," the Wisconsin lawmaker said Wednesday.

"But this deals with the right to vote, and these people are United States citizens," Sensenbrenner said. "They aren't illegal immigrants, but they've gone through the process and they have been naturalized and it seems to me these people should not be confused because they don't have the proper instructions on how to vote (for) the candidates of their choice."

The language requirement is a complicated one. But it basically requires localities and even states to provide language assistance under certain conditions. One threshold is when 5% of the voting age population belongs to a single-language minority group and has limited proficiency in English. Another is when 10,000 or more citizens in a jurisdiction meet that test. The government uses formulas and population data to determine when the requirements apply.

Under the law, almost 500 political jurisdictions - and the states of Alaska, Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas - have been required to print ballots in other languages.

The language minority groups that are covered under the law are American Indians, Asian-Americans, Alaskan natives and citizens of Spanish heritage.

Wisconsin is one of a minority of states in which no jurisdictions are required to print bilingual ballots.

But State Elections Board chief Kevin Kennedy said Thursday that he expected some parts of the state to be required to print Spanish and Hmong ballots after the next census. Kennedy also said the state already had hired Spanish and Hmong translators for its new voter registration system that goes on line this fall.

5 different languages
No lawmakers spoke against the ballot provisions at a House hearing Thursday. But the witness from California, Orange County Supervisor Chris Norby, complained sharply about the law and the way it is being applied by the Justice Department. Norby said Orange County would have to print ballots in five languages (English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Chinese and Korean) and might have to add in the future Tagalog, Hindi, Farsi and others. He said the costs in a single election cycle could reach $20 million.

Norby also said the ballot rules could fuel a political backlash.

But supporters said having bilingual ballots had boosted turnout among minority groups and aided voters whose English might be sufficient to meet a citizenship test but not to decipher complicated referendum questions.

The Voting Rights Act as a whole has occasioned a rare convergence of backers behind its renewal, including lawmakers on both sides of the heated immigration debate, which has touched on similar issues of assimilation.

Sensenbrenner has been a lightning rod in that debate, thanks to the House bill he crafted that is passionately opposed by Latino and civil rights groups. But he has been a longtime advocate of the Voting Rights Act and even teamed up Wednesday with Senate Democrat Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts to promote the measure in a conference call with reporters.

Leaders of both parties in both chambers - normally at loggerheads - gathered Tuesday to announce the bill's introduction.

"I've never seen anything quite like that," said LaShawn Warren, legislative counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union and one of the bill's supporters.

The House Republicans who oppose the bilingual ballot provision sent a joint letter to Sensenbrenner in early February, saying "multilingual ballots . . . divide our country, increase the risk of voter error and fraud, and burden local taxpayers."

Yea, makes you wonder who he is REALLY working for.

W

I was wondering why maldef was so excited about the voting rights act the other day. I guess now we know part of the reason.

http://www.civilrights.org/issues/votin ... m?id=42886

MALDEF Applauds Intoduction of Bipartisan Bills to Extend the Voting Rights Act
Legislative Action Expected Soon in Congress


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 2, 2006

Laura Rodriguez
(213) 629-2512 ext. 124



The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) today commended the United States Congress for introducing bipartisan bills in the House and Senate to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act is among MALDEF's top legislative priorities for 2006.

"We are pleased that the House and Senate have acted in a bipartisan manner to begin to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act," stated John Trasviña, MALDEF Interim President and General Counsel. "The right to vote is the foundation of our democracy, and the Voting Rights Act provides the legal protections for all Americans."

The Voting Rights Act is the most effective civil rights statute ever enacted, and while its successes has generated increased political power for Latinos at the local, state, and federal levels, there is still much work to be done. Critical provisions of the Act, including the language assistance provisions contained within Section 203, are set to expire next year. "The right to vote is only meaningful when the language of the ballot and other election materials are fully comprehensible to the voter," Mr. Trasviña noted.

"The Latino community has benefited greatly because of the Voting Rights Act, but discrimination in election processes persists," Mr. Trasviña stated. "The bipartisan, bicameral introduction of legislation to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act signals that both political parties recognize that discrimination in voting processes continues and that this crucial civil rights legislation is still very necessary."

In coming weeks, MALDEF will work with key congressional leaders to ensure the passage of the Voting Rights Act reauthorization bills.

The House Republicans who oppose the bilingual ballot provision sent a joint letter to Sensenbrenner in early February, saying "multilingual ballots . . . divide our country, increase the risk of voter error and fraud, and burden local taxpayers

English only......that seems to be about as difficult to understand as illegal. What part is so tough?

If they are here legally why can't they understand English????[/b]

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060 ... -3298r.htm

Language rules impede extension of voter rights act
By Brian DeBose
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published May 5, 2006

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The House Judiciary Committee will face a tough battle in getting approval for an extension of the Voting Rights Act that includes current provisions for foreign-language ballots.

In a spillover from the raging immigration debate, many members of Congress are opposing an extension of Section 203. Critics of the provision say some immigrants are not learning English because the nation routinely provides them information in their native languages. Others said the provision is unnecessary, because most foreign-born voters can read English.

More than 50 lawmakers sent a letter to Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., Wisconsin Republican, urging him to strip Section 203 out of the bill, but he has refused.

"It is warranted and the evidence is overwhelming from the hearings, and there has been an opt-out provision in the law for some time," he said. "If jurisdictions feel they have solved that problem for their voters, then they should work to opt out rather than strike out the entire provision."

Reviewing Section 203 in a hearing yesterday, Orange County, Calif., Supervisor Chris Norby called for a review of the foreign-language provision.

"Accepting the naturalized voters' self-description of their own English ability -- speaking English 'well' or 'very well' should both be considered adequate -- is the first thing we should do," Mr. Norby said.

The law requires that any jurisdiction with 10,000 or more voters, or where 10 percent of the electorate is foreign-born and deemed not to be proficient in English, provide ballots and other election materials in the language native to that population.

Mr. Norby said Congress should eliminate the numerical threshold and have a set percentage higher than the current standard, and end the "insulting" practice of assuming that foreign-born voters are illiterate in English.

Rep. Melvin Watt, North Carolina Democrat and Judiciary Committee member, said the Section 203 dispute was becoming a deal-breaker.

"We didn't need this to become a political football," said Mr. Watt, chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus.

The issue created tension among various minority factions, Mr. Watt said.

"In most jurisdictions, Hispanics reach the threshold [of 10 percent of the electorate to get foreign-language ballots] but Asians do not, and I think that's why smaller minority groups had a little bit bigger dog in that fight than the Hispanic or black caucuses did," he said.

In the hearing yesterday, Karen Narasaki, president of the Asian American Justice Center, cited the 2003 gubernatorial election in Louisiana as an example of the persistence of racial issues in election politics. In that election, Democrat Kathleen Babineaux Blanco defeated Republican Bobby Jindal, who is of Indian ancestry. Mr. Jindal was elected to the House a year later.

Miss Narasaki said lawsuits to enforce Section 203 multilingual-ballot mandates have been responsible for a 20 percent rise in Filipino voting in San Diego and a 40 percent increase in Vietnamese registration. She said such enforcement in Harris County, Texas, doubled the number of Vietnamese eligible voters there.

"But this deals with the right to vote, and these people are United States citizens," Sensenbrenner said. "They aren't illegal immigrants, but they've gone through the process and they have been naturalized and it seems to me these people should not be confused because they don't have the proper instructions on how to vote (for) the candidates of their choice."

had they gone through the naturalization process LEGALLY, they would have been required to read. write and comprehend English ...