The bill to declare English the state’s official language left the House Military, Veterans and Homeland Security Committee with bipartisan support this week, raising the chances that it or something like it will pass the full Legislature this session. With the teeth of an earlier version pulled regarding official government documents, the latest bill seems even more like pointless anti-immigration pandering. Yet Committee Chairman Don Myers (in photo), R-Derby, declared, “This is a pro-immigration bill because it encourages those who aren’t proficient in our common language to get this way. We’re not taking away their first language.”
But does anybody living in Kansas really need legislative encouragement to learn English?
When Rep. Mario Goico, R-Wichita, spoke of what learning English had done in his life since he left Cuba as a child, Rep. Bill Light, R-Rolla, responded: “I appreciate what Rep. Goico said, but I just ask the question, did he need a state law to do that?”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- littlejohn on Open thread 11/23
- littlejohn on Open thread 11/23
- littlejohn on Open thread 11/23
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/23
37 Comments
One more desperate attempt to fully eradicate the culture of the Native Americans by making their language illegal. Don Myers is just another racist waiting for the day he can wear his white hood in public.
“But does anybody living in Kansas really need legislative encouragement to learn English?”
YES!
As I was leaving my building last night I ran into the cleaning crew picking up the trash. I asked the guy to stop, i had one more can to pull out. He preceded to look at me with a blank stare and made a grunt type noise. So I ran back into my office, grabbed the can and came back out, he was no where to be found so I left. In the lobby I ran into another lady, who barely spoke English who I was able to tell that I left the can outside my office.
My point in this is, YES we need to FORCE these people who come here, legally or not, to speak the common language. It is ridiculous that we can not converse with our employees. Cornjo Construction sends its White supervisors to Spanish classes so that they can talk to their workers, who most don’t speak English.
So my answer again is YES!
We ABSOLUTELY need this law.
A business, community, State or Nation, is ONLY as good as its ability to communicate effectively.
Diversity might be good in some things – chocolate, for instance, but NOT when it comes to communication.
People living in the United States MUST use a uniform language to accurately disseminate vital information in all walks of life. Unless we plan on switching to Spanish – it’s time we enforced English as our national language and require ALL Americans to use it.
Children in grade schools need to speak English in able to keep up with their American counterparts. If they can’t – the entire class must necessarily slow to their level of learning – and that is just plain wrong, not only for the children, but for society, in general, who then suffers with less-than-optimal graduates.
English NOW.
Make it the law.
Eradicate the culture of “Native Americans”? What in the world is up with that ridiculous comment?
First, government documents are not written in Sioux, or Cherokee, etc., like they are in Spanish. Second, lots of tax dollars are being spent to PRESERVE the Indian center.
Third, “native”? No such thing, as archeological evidence proves, indigenous people came to this country via the Bering Strait about 25,000 years prior to the Europeans. Earlier immigration does not equate with “native”.
I cringe when I see driver’s tests printed in something other than English–how are these people supposed to read “Lane closed ahead” when they can’t even read the language?
YES, we NEED an English only law!!!
This law is just pretense at doing someting about the illegal immigration problem.
How about some real action?
Round them up and ship them out.
Hey JR, who do you propose to take the jobs that will be left by shipping all of thoes people out?
According to the eagle we only have about 500 homeless in wichita and there are thousands upon thousands in Kansas that are illegal.
I dont know about you but i dont want to work in a meat packing plant or pave a road.
People don’t learn English because of a law; they learn English because they MUST to be successful. Every wave of immigration over our history has faced this same issue, and repeatedly, the second generation is English proficient, while the first generation struggles.
Go back in history. We had this same debate with German, Polish, Italian immigrants, among others. This is not new; it’s the same song, second verse.
This bill is pandering. Meaningless and pointless pandering. At times, racist pandering.
There are serious issues regarding illegal immigration; and I don’t pretend to have all the answers (though the biggest answer is to crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegals – jobs are the reason they are here); but I know that “rounding them up” will not work. What do you do with the kids born here when you ship the parents home?
And making English an “official language” is meaningless fluff. Get on with real work, legislature.
I would rather see a law requiring every United States citizen multi-lingual. English would be the primary required language, but in addition, every American over the age of thirty should be proficient in, at least, one other language (preferably more than one other) of their choice. All official documents would be in English only. But, look around in the global economy, and you will find that almost all developed, and many developing counties are multi-lingual. In Viet Nam, most people today speak Vietnamese, English and French. In Laos, Lao, English and French are common. In China, most people speak more than one dialect of Chinese and English. In Japan, everyone speaks Japanese and English, except for the elderly.
With all of the problems our educational system has here, it is still among the best in the world. Which makes more sense? Mandate that people who have not had the benefits of our system be burdened by learning a very difficult language, or teaching other languages and other cultures to our own? Couldn’t hurt international relations, either! We don’t need a law — we need a personal commitment to excellence.
And this is the same Don Myers who was on the soapbox for censorship earlier this week! I wonder how many languages (including English), he is fluent in? :)
JR writes:” How about some real action?
Round them up and ship them out.”———-
My only response; HELL YES!!!
Gee, we’ve been on the same page a number of times now.
there are a lot of things that are a waste of time in the kansas legislature.
I always find it amusing, however, when the WE Blog thinks something is a waste of time they proclaim it from the mountain-top – but when things like Senator Betts’ useless resolution about the iraq war hits they actually say it has validity and should be discussed.
hypocrites.
This is nuts. I get just as irritated with people who move to the U.S. but don’t bother to learn the language. But just how would this proposed law be enforced?
Do we jail them? Okay, how many of you are willing to have your taxes raised to build new jails? Do you want to pay for more bi-lingual jailers/guards?
Do we fine them? Okay, that might raise some state revenue, but wouldn’t it also require more court time, therefore reducing that same revenue?
Let’s be reasonable here. It’s fair to create a law that states that all official paperwork be in English only. We are an English speaking country. But a law that says everyone MUST speak English? Does that mean we’ll be monitoring homes where another language dominates?
If you want only English spoken, then don’t make it so easy for people to get away with not speaking it. Make them uncomfortable, and they’ll have to learn it or not be able to communicate with the majority.
Will we also hold those who speak Ebonics to the fire?
This could get very interesting.
How about those who speak “redneck” RD?
This law is just pretense at doing someting about the illegal immigration problem.
How about some real action?
Round them up and ship them out.
My 2 cents worth, I don’t think it is about forcing people to speak a language, but rather an edict that no more government documents be printed (at increased cost) in any language other than English.
Consider that in CA, ballots are printed in over 20 different languages. The California DMV manual in printed in 9 languages. Seems to me, if they can’t read street signs, they should NOT be driving.
Course..it seems around here that most people can’t read STOP signs..
RM,
While I agree with your bi-lingual comments for America, I wonder how this would work. It’s much easier to learn a second language when young, but which language? Who would determine that?
My daughters were taught a little Spanish in grade school, but what if I had preferred they were taught French? Or German? Or Russian or Chinese? Would those opportunities be provided for all students?
I could count to 10 in French when I was 4. By the time I was 6, I knew a few prayers and greetings. I was fortunate enough to be taught French in school in 4th grade and Spanish in 5th & 6th. I even took private French lessons when I was 10/11, and then took one year of French again in high school. Can I speak it now? Hardly. (Believe me, in this case, if you don’t use it, you lose it.) I’m also known for confusing my French and Spanish. Easy to do, since they are both considered “romance languages,” as their basis is Latin.
When my mother (age 84) was in school, Latin was a required course in junior high. A foreign language credit has, in the past, been an advantage for entering college, but not a requirement. But most small schools only offer one foreign language, because that’s all they can afford.
Any suggestions?
What about Rep. Bill Light’s comment? Those people that come to America and want a piece of the American dream, will learn to speak English. Really, will passing a law that ‘makes’ English the ‘official’ language of Kansas solve anything? No.
Raptor,
I agree that legal documents should be in English. When they get that way, will you let me know? *grin*
KFG,
For some odd reason, I understand Redneck.
Tony “Hey JR, who do you propose to take the jobs that will be left by shipping all of thoes people out?” Americans will take those jobs because employers will be FORCED to pay decent wages to get them done. Now the stockholders and CEOS may have to take a little hit to compensate the extra expense of paying decent wages. And that is fine by me.
I am in full support of English as an lawfully stated officiall language. As for Doug, I can sympathize to the effects of the white man’s ugly history vis-a-vis the American Indian but it’s often told that modern man who does not learn from history is doomed to repeat it. I submit that the new immigrants, or should I say illegal immigrants, do not carry muskets…they are carrying babies on their shoulders and invading our country. Let’s learn from what happened to the American Indian and let’s prevent the same from happening to the English speaking core of the modern US.Send the illegals back and control the borders. There is no reason to pretend we are the same country that existed in the 18th and 19th century…we are not. We are populated and we now must control the incoming. Sucks to be a hungry immigrant in the new millenium. We do not owe them a country.
I have to go along with the English requirement – as noted above we must be able to commi=unicate. I do not see this as eradicating my heritage (Native American) in that it does not prohibit being bilingual.
I would have an examption for people living on sovereign territory (reservations) in that they should be allowed their own sovereignty under treaty and that would include language. However, I don’t see Harrah’s doing well if the staff there don’t speak english.
RD, you really know how to hurt a guy. :D
Why is it that all of the members of The Eagle’s editorial board are left wing kooks like Holman? Doesn’t Wichita deserve some balance from this Stalinist rag?
“…the latest bill seems even more like pointless anti-immigration pandering.”
Why can’t holman and others like her be honest and call it what it is. Anti-ILLEGAL immigration.Calling this a debate about immigration is a lie. Wonder why they can’t seem to put the “illegal” in front of it?
RD: Like any other worthwhile project, the devil is in the details. You’re right that language is much easier for the young. And the parents, at least initially, would be responsible for choosing the language. And, of course, it would be provided for all students.
Then comes the problems of older people, like myself. I am multi-lingual (or was, I laughed and laughed at your ‘use it or lose it’ comment — that is so true). There would have to be a phased in reduction of age to which this applied. People over that age would be exempt, of course, for probably two or three generations before it was universally available.
And it would be expensive — but we’ve spent trillions of dollars on much dumber plans. Personally, I would insist that a basic foundation (4 semesters, perhaps?) because of it’s applications in almost all occidental languages, and the understanding of conjugation and declension is even somewhat applicable to oriental tongues.
I hope this at least shed a little light on where I was going with this — I’m sure it left many more unanswered questions that it answered any.
Whoops! “…basic foundation in Latin…” is what I was trying to say there.
rm – I am reasonably certain that you are at least bi-lingual. You have shown a decent command of English here on the Blog. And, I would assume that you still speak your NATIVE language – legalese!
Personally, I don’t want to hear anything about “English only” or rounding up illegal immigrants UNTIL those that employ illegal aliens are severely punished.
Until then, everything else is just blowing smoke – it is meaningless.
There is only one reason that people enter this country illegally and that is to find jobs. If there are no jobs given to those that are here illegally, the problem will be greatly minimized.
And when I refer to punishment for those that hire illegals, I am not talking about “slap on the wrist” fines – I am talking about jail terms for business owners, businesses being put out of business, property being seized.
Every other discussion regarding illegal immigration is just nonsense – they come here for a reason and until there is no reason they will continue to come, regardless of the laws that are passed by pandering politicians.
WSC: I agree completely that the only reasons Hispanics are entering this country illegally are jobs, and the fault and consequences must be felt by those that would employ them. I fear, however, that Mideastern Muslims are entering this country illegally for far more ominous purposes. Capturing one of them is more relevant to our safety and security than 1,000 Hispanics.
Unfortunately, RM, the radical Islamists that come to the US for do us harm are well trained to blend in with American society. They speak English and fit in with the Arab – Americans easily. Muhammad Atta looked like any other immigrant Arab.
Unfortunately.
No doubt. They’re much harder to catch … we need to utilize more sophisticated and more expensive techniques. But, I’m afraid that’s only wishful thinking, considering the people who are supposedly maintaining safety and security’s idea is using National Guard troops to build a damned fence. You know, they couldn’t even get to rudimentary logical step 2: If the people are coming here for jobs, and we want a fence, why not pay otherwise would-be illegals appropriate U.S. comparable wages to build the fence for us, as long as they continued to live south of the Rio Grande? Nah, that might actually make some sense.
A while back, while I was in north Wichita, I slipped and fell on a patch of glare ice. The man that stopped and helped me up didn’t speak a word of English, and I have no clue as to his immigration status, but I am nevertheless grateful that he was there and cared enough to help me. It didn’t matter that he spoke no English, the universal language of his actions was quite sufficient.Maybe we should take our cue from him and demonstrate our mutual humanity with actions. This “English only” talk is divisive and racist no matter what fancy rationalizations we offer. We need to drop such disgusting attitudes. Now!
Law or no law, the State can never force anyone to speak or not speak any language.
People from foreign places have been coming to this great land of ours for thousands of years. Each new group that comes brings their native language, culture, foods, traditions, etc. This is how the world has always worked and, most likely, how it always will.
If we want to position ourselves and our children to have the best futures possible, we need to encourage multilingualism, not discourage it. What message does a law like this send to our children? That we live in a multi-cultural world and knowing a language other than English will give you more opportunities to compete in the job market, or the heck with everyone that is not American, I will speak English and only English and if they can’t understand me it is their problem?
At some point, we will have to put our nationalistic pride aside and face the fact that there are 300 million Americans, and 6 billion people in the world. Mandarin anyone?
VT, my sincere apologies.
Now it’s Ben’s turn to offer the same. *grin*
I appreciate a good attorney or anyone who can make heads or tails of a legal document.
“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.
But, this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all.
We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty, and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
Theodore Roosevelt 1907
raptor, what about ‘African Americans’ ?