Thread: English-only Law Likely to Go Unenforced

http://ocregister.com/ocregister/new...le_1150425.php

English-only law likely would go unenforced

GORDON DILLOW
Register columnist
GLDillow@aol.com




Last week's debate in the U.S. Senate over declaring English to be the official language of the United States will probably turn out to be a big fat waste of time.

Because even if the amendment to the immigration reform bill succeeds and English is formally made our "national language," chances are that politicians and government officials will simply ignore it.

Just like they do in California.

Many people aren't aware of this, but English is by law the official language of this state – and it has been for 20 years, ever since California voters passed Proposition 63 in 1986. That amendment to the California Constitution clearly stated that "English is the official language of California" and directed the state Legislature to enforce that declaration "by appropriate legislation."

And Prop. 63 was hardly a squeaker. It was approved by a whopping 73 percent of the voters, said to be the biggest margin of any ballot issue in the history of the state.

So what has happened in the two decades since voters overwhelmingly made English California's official language?

The answer is, absolutely nothing. The state Legislature passed no supporting legislation, and the state Attorney General's Office later issued a ruling that the proposition was merely "advisory" in nature, and not binding on the state.

In short, state legislators and public officials acted as if Prop. 63 never existed. Which is why, to use just one example, today you can take the written California driver's test not only in English but in Amharic, Arabic, Armenian, Cambodian, Chinese, Croatian, Farsi, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hindi, Hmong, Hungarian, Indonesian, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Laotian, Polish, Portuguese, Punjabi, Romanian, Russian, Samoan, Spanish, Tagalog, Thai, Tongan, Turkish and Vietnamese – 31 foreign languages in all.

(The Department of Motor Vehicles doesn't have stats on how many people take the written test in foreign languages. But it reports that 20 percent of all of its "public contacts" are conducted in non-English languages.)

True, not everyone has taken the ignoring of Prop. 63 lying down.

Five years ago, for example, Ted Costa and the activist group People's Advocate – the same guys who later launched the recall drive against Gov. Gray Davis – were considering suing the Department of Motor Vehicles over the language issue. But they eventually abandoned the idea because of adverse court decisions and the $500,000 or so it would have cost them to pursue the lawsuit.

"Nothing's going on (with Prop. 63) right now," Costa told me – although he added, "We just might take it up again."

Meanwhile, federal laws, which supersede state laws like Prop. 63, have made it mandatory that voters in California and everywhere else be able to vote in languages other than English – a requirement that wouldn't change even if the U.S. Senate's current English measure becomes law.

That's why people in Orange County can vote in English, Chinese, Vietnamese, Spanish or Korean – this despite the fact that only U.S. citizens can vote, and that to become a U.S. citizen applicants must be able to read, write and speak basic English.

But the English requirement for citizenship isn't very strict. Applicants are only required to read, write and understand such simple sentences as "Today is a sunny day," and "It is important for all citizens to vote" – which doesn't necessarily mean they're able to decipher the pros and cons of a ballot measure written in English. And older folks and people with learning disabilities can get a waiver from the English requirement.

Still, it's hard to believe we wouldn't be better off if we all voted in the same language – if only to be certain that we're all voting on the same thing. Given the vagaries of translating English into other languages, that's not always easy.

But as I said, the current Senate measure concerning English wouldn't affect multilingual voting, or change most of the other multilingual requirements the federal government mandates. The fact is that making English the official national language would probably just be for show.

Because as the fate of Prop. 63 illustrates, when it comes to having a common language, the courts and the politicians don't really seem to care what voters think or say.

Even when they say it in plain English.

Well then, I guess it will be up to us and our elected paid officials to enforce the laws, right?

If this becomes law then we as Americans can simply enforce it on our own....it means that you won't have to employ someone who can't speak, write and comprehend English as this would compromise your business as those individuals would be considered undesirable hires. Now, of course, this applies to any language so why would an employer have to be burdened with the responsibility of dealing with the hundreds of languages and dialects in the world? Certainly some people (and we know who they are) would clammer that this is racism....I say let them and still don't hire them.