Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member Skippy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    973

    Bilingual voter pamphlet draws criticism in Phoenix

    http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=5331568

    Bilingual voter pamphlet draws criticism


    PHOENIX -- Some Arizonans are lashing out at the state's campaign finance agency for its bilingual candidate pamphlet, which critics call an affront both for reasons of language and cost.

    The Citizens Clean Elections Commission received 17 letters and faxes critical of the pamphlet mailed to all voters' households before the primary election, and a commission aide said dozens more people telephoned the commission's Phoenix office to complain.

    The criticism of the bilingual pamphlet, mailed to 1.6 million Arizona households, comes at a time of increased debate concerning illegal immigration and several months before Arizonans vote on a legislative referendum to make English the state's official language.

    "This is really irritating," one letter writer, Ira Larsen of Tucson, said during a telephone interview. "To me, to print those things in Spanish is ... unpatriotic in a sense that English is our primary language and our Founding Fathers determined that."

    The primary election version of the commission's pamphlet opens with 106 pages of candidates' statements in English and follows with the same statements translated into Spanish on the same number of pages.

    "This is AMERICA not Mexico and our language is ENGLISH not Spanish," Mike and Judy Lairmore wrote in a July 27 letter. "We resent our hard-earned tax dollars being wasted like this."

    Larsen's July 24 letter said it doesn't make sense to print the pamphlet in Spanish because voters must be citizens and naturalized citizens must be able to read and write English.

    "It's time we get real and quit bending over for people who don't qualify for full participation in this democratic process, which seems to be fading, I'm sorry to say," Larsen wrote.

    Some of the other letters and faxes were unsigned, with one person scrawling an unprintable suggestion to the commission.

    Michael Becker, the commission's voter education manager, fielded many of the calls complaining about the pamphlet.

    "I referred them to their congressmen and explained the Voting Rights Act" and 1975 amendments that imposed the mandate, Becker said.

    A 1998 voter-approved state law that created the Clean Elections funding system for state election campaigns also mandated that the commission publish pamphlets with statements submitted by candidates. A federal law intended to protect minorities' voting rights requires that Arizona produce the pamphlet, like other election materials, in both English and Spanish, officials said.

    "It's not something new," Assistant Attorney General Diana Varela, the commission's lawyer. "The bottom line is it does have to be translated."

    Becker said the total cost of producing and distributing the primary and general election pamphlets would be approximately $1.3 million. He said he didn't have a breakout for the costs in providing the Spanish-language portion except that translations cost $12,000.

    The commission gets its funding _ most of which pays for financing provided participating candidates _ from surcharges on criminal and traffic fines, voluntary contributions to the funding system and penalties assessed against candidates for violations.

    Commission members during a recent meeting discussed whether the commission could scale back the Spanish-language portion of the pamphlet. One suggestion was to separate the pamphlet and provide the Spanish-language version only on request.

    That wouldn't fly legally with the U.S. Justice Department because it would put a burden on Spanish-speaking voters that English-speaking voters wouldn't face, Varela said.

  2. #2
    Senior Member sippy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UT
    Posts
    3,798
    That wouldn't fly legally with the U.S. Justice Department because it would put a burden on Spanish-speaking voters that English-speaking voters wouldn't face, Varela said.
    My guess is that at least 40% of them can't vote legally anyway.
    God forbid we Americans put out or burden any spanish-speaking voters. The only burden I see it would create for them is a need to 'Habla Ingles immediatemente!'
    "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting the same results is the definition of insanity. " Albert Einstein.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •