There are 46 countries that claim English as their official language and, surprisingly, the US is not one of them.
The US has no official language. In fact, agencies that receive federal money are required by law to provide services in other languages when asked.
On Aug. 11, 2000, President Bill Clinton signed Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency.”
The order requires federal agencies to examine the services they provide, identify any need for services to those with limited English proficiency (LEP), and develop and implement systems to provide those services so LEP persons can have meaningful access to them. For example, if someone goes to a federal agency and speaks only Chinese the agency must be able to provide services in that language.
When people around the world decide to learn English, they have a choice between learning American English and British English.
For a country to be one of the sources of grammar and spelling, it’s a wonder why the US has not made English its official language. Advocates of the status quo claim that the US is a melting pot of cultures and languages, and that codifying English would disenfranchise millions of voters. They make it seem as if people are incapable of learning another language.
Recently in Texas, there was a man who testified in front of the state legislature in Spanish. He was testifying against the Stronger Economy, Stronger Borders Act of 2009 — an anti-immigrant bill similar to the one in Arizona — and Sen. Chris Harris told him the very act was “insulting to (Texas).” Rational voices dissented and defended the man, claiming he had every right to speak whatever language he wanted to under the First Amendment.
The US is a melting pot nation; making English the official language wouldn’t change this fact.
Actually, to acquire United States citizenship one must prove to have an understanding of the English language, including an ability to read, write and speak simple words and phrases.
Only those who are deemed too “old” to learn a new language are exempt from taking the English test. They must still take the civics test, however, which can be taken in their native language.
As someone who is bilingual in Texas, I can say that at times it is surprising how some remain defiant to learning English. No one expects complete fluency, but I’ve been witness to some surprising situations.
I’ve seen Latinos speak in Spanish to blonde-haired and blue-eyed waitresses, expecting comprehension.
The worst part is that they do not begin by asking the well-mannered “Do you speak Spanish?” question but begin in their native tongue. It is rather insulting to go to another country to reside there permanently and never learn the language.
I believe there are no people who would migrate to the United States expecting to hear something other than English. Having a national language would unite the American identity and prevent the “us vs. them” mentality that is visible in Texas.
There are “cliques” between those who speak the same language, which in turn creates tension. Texas, and the nation, would be united by one simple factor: A common language.
Alejandro Caballero is a creative writing junior and may be reached at [email protected].
The nation already has a common, unifying language: English albeit informally. It has only been Republican members of Congress who have recently submitted bills to have English declared as the official language. Even if English were the official language, how would that in effect help native English-speakers? You wouldn't have to press 1 for English? This is just an attempt by a bitter group of Americans to limit and encroach upon the spread of culture and diversity within the US. And what about places that are trying to promote languages that have been historically present in certain areas? Take Louisiana for instance. The State of Louisiana created CODOFIL in 1968, a state agency to "do any and all things necessary to accomplish the development, utilization, and preservation of the French language as found in Louisiana for the cultural, economic and touristic benefit of the state." There are people living there and in other places across the US who have been in their respective areas, speaking their own languages before the US even came into existence. Some of the older generations don't even speak English to this day. To infringe upon their constitutional rights as Americans would be outrageous.
You are comparing a State run program in Louisiana, to a Federal mandate. They are two different things. States can still do what ever they want. How does choosing an official language encroach on any one's Consttutional rights? How does that qualify as outrageous? People can and will speak whatever language they want. Individual states can choose to accomodate people with multi-language voting ballots, and government forms etc.
"It is rather insulting to go to another country to reside there permanently and never learn the language". I would add to that "…and expect that country to cater to you". You are not giving up anything– in order to assimilate– just a little. By aquiring minimal English skills you are adding to what you already bring to the table.
Diversity is a wonderful thing and is strongly encouraged everywhere we turn — but let's not allow our diversity to become the very thing that drives us apart.
A mandate is court ordered. For the US to declare an official language, it would be a federal law and not a mandate. Federal law takes precedence over state law. It encroaches on someone's rights when that person is elderly, born in America, and speaks no English and wants to vote but can't vote because the state can't provide him or her with a ballot in his or her language.
Alice your example is a rare example or case. And only really applies to those who may be gaining citizenship when they are elderly. Other than that most of those who would fall into your case are here ILLEGALLY and therefore do not have those rights that a citizen would.
I agree with this article 100%.
I'm thinking of moving to Mexico and once, there, demand their government provide me, an immigrant, with all my needed documents in my native language and then to demand social programs and entitlements and then, once I have them, I'm going to get a low-paying job and send most of my income back to my relatives in Houston. I think my new adopted home should be perfectly okay with this because they embrace civil liberties and "diversity." Does anyone see a problem with my plan?
Don't blame the immigrants, blame the people who hire them. You wana pay more for that chipotle burrito so that an American can make it instead? Go ahead. Your corporate overlords are most definitely NOT going to take a cut in profit. if the mexicans weren't making it, then it would be a china man, plain and simple. You mad bro?
Sólo en Estados Unidos.