English as the official language of the U.S. Essay

The English language has already been established as the official language in 28 States; this would beg the question, what made these States pass such an Act, especially since the Courts already designated such a law as being unconstitutional and infringing upon the First Amendment speech rights (Feder, 12). This question will be addressed throughout the paper, which will first consider the legal proceedings that have occurred thus far for this ‘Official English’ movement. The finding of this paper is self-evident in that the objections to this movement have been rendered invalid, largely due to a lack of irrefutable arguments as the paper will demonstrate. The numerous advantages that will be highlighted will argue for, and show, the benefit to the nation – to both the majority as well as the minorities – of making English the official language of the U. S. U. S. Legislature As of the publishing of the CRS Report in 2007, 28 states in the United States have declared English as the official language in their state constitutions. On the flip side, the U. S. Constitution has enacted several laws such as the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act, and the Equal Educational Opportunities Act in an effort to protect the language rights of the country’s minorities. These Acts authorize, amongst others, the use of voting materials in states and political subdivisions, with instructions in two languages at the same time, as well the use of languages other than English, when deemed essential, to provide effective and efficient public and private services. The U. S. Congress initiated its effort towards the Official English movement in 1984 with ‘The English Language Amendment’ that was proposed for the Constitution, and it culminated when ‘The Language in Government Act’ passed the House in 1996, but failed to do so in the Senate. Amendments to ‘The Language in Government Act’ were later introduced, with the Inhofe Amendment passing in the 109th Congress which affirmed English as the ‘national language’, and later as the unifying language of the U. S. ; at the same time, ensuring the rights of minorities (Feder, 4). Consequent to Amendments that were later introduced, the passage of such Legislature would now largely be a symbolic one with negligible or zero actual effect on the inhabitants of the country, with regards to the legal aspects. This is largely because â€Å"†¦ an affirmation by the Congress of the central place of English in our national life and culture †¦ would not, of its own force, require or prohibit any particular action or policy by the government or private persons. Nor would it, without more, imply the repeal or modification of existing federal or state laws and regulations sanctioning the use of non-English for various purposes,† as stated in Feder, 4-5. Benefits The basic principle upon which the proponents of this movement rest their reason for making English the official language of the United States is that it serves to create a bond of unity. While this bond can be used in order to address any issues through more effective communication between the relevant parties, it also does not rob anyone of their heritage. As stated by Adams, 111, â€Å"All languages and cultures are precious in our history and are to be preserved and maintained. These are not, however, public responsibilities. † Parsimonious equity is another, much touted reason for the movement. Where equity states that all judicial hearings should allow a defendant the right to be heard in the language (s)he is most conversant and comfortable with so as to permit the population to be served by the government. Parsimonious equity, on the other hand, maintains that in order to ensure that the government is not bogged down under administrative costs of ensuring an interpreter for each individual need, an official language must be recognized that will ensure that all legal and government related proceedings be dealt with in English. Such a system remains equitable, as well as, limits the costs associated with such activities (Fishman, 59). With regards to the ‘language-rights’ argument it must be noted that while protecting the rights of minorities in of itself is a sufficiently altruistic and, in the case of the U. S. , required task of the government, it must be ensured that the majority not be discriminated against either. Such a paradox would result in the formation of extreme political parties that would effectively shut out the minorities, due to their large, and united, numbers. In light of this argument, the proponents stress that by officiating the role of the English speaking majority in the United States the government will preclude the establishment of such highly biased and extreme parties, and maintain the unity and equity of the nation. Therefore, while it may be historically justified for minorities to seek redress for past acts of subjugation, as usually happens with minorities, and oppose the majority, it would be more I keeping with the â€Å"interest of [the] linguistic minorities to seek a balance,† as stated by Joseph, 62. To an extent it seems understandable that the minorities might feel as if they are being presented with a raw deal, but when the minorities themselves start supporting the cause for making English the official language this argument against the movement is rendered void, and is in fact turned into another reason for supporting the movement. Such a case was witnessed in Alabama, where the black-majority counties voted for the movement by a significant margin (Tatalovich, 244). Learning from Canada Looking at the northern neighbor of the United States, proponents of the movement have found several examples that corroborate their stand of maintaining a single official language for the country. The numerous political conflicts that Canada has faced over its bilingual official languages status have merely served to show how not to operate in one’s own country, in addition to clearly distinguishing the effect of considering the language issue as irrelevant and trivial. As stated by Ricento, 37, â€Å"the disconcerting strength gathered by separatism in Canada contains a lesson for the United States and its approach to bilingual education. † In trying to placate a larger amount of people by using its dual official language system, Canada has only shown to its more powerful neighbor how it is sometimes in the interest of the minorities to ignore their protests and support the decision of the majority. By catering to the Quebec speaking individuals in their country Canada has given them the right to lose out on greater economic benefits as shown by the research conducted by Li, 135-136: the effect of the use of an official language is signified by the â€Å"†¦$911 [male earnings] above the mean even after controlling for other variables,† and similarly, in the U. S. (Zavodny, 449). Conclusion The English language is the language of the majority as far as the U. S is concerned. There has been a movement towards making it the official language of the country in addition to it being so in over half the States already. However, this movement has subsequently led to the minorities crying foul over the perceived loss of their rights and the perceived inequitable behavior that they expect. The proponents of this movement, on the other hand, cite the greater cause of national unity, as well as that of parsimonious equity to vie with the concern of future lost income of minorities. It is the duty of the Government to now realize the potential benefits that will result in letting Acts based on making English the official Language through Congress. Especially since the greatest objection of minority language rights and perceived subjugation by the majority has been proven to be baseless in light of the Alabama vote. The remaining minorities should seek to overcome their emotional attachment to their original heritage, and understand that this movement will not necessarily threaten their roots; instead, it will result in greater opportunities for them through a more equitable treatment at court and business. Beyond these realizations, the government should initiate a budget towards facilitating the teaching of English to immigrants who cannot afford to learn it through their own devices. This is in light of the view that current instructions for the English language, in the United States, are inadequate to prepare them for their future life in the country (Citrin, 108). With Canada serving as an example of the effects of having more than one official language, the United States can ensure that it does not fall into the same trap by creating the equivalent Spanish-speaking enclaves in their country. Economically, politically, and culturally, having only English as the official language will help deal with a lot of problems along these facets of life that will prove to, over time, strengthen the role of equality in the society – a value that is immensely appreciated in the current era, especially in these neck of the woods. Eventually this movement will succeed, because it not only enjoys widespread support from the majority and a few minorities of the U. S. , but it has also managed to secure enough political support behind it to make it a key bill: one that is presented to the Congress in almost every sitting since the mid-1890’s. Works Cited Adams, K. L. & Brink, D. T. Perspectives on Official English: The Campaign for English as the Official Language of the USA. Walter de Gruyter. Fishman, J. A. The Rise and Fall of the Ethnic Revival: Perspectives on Language and Ethnicity. Walter de Gruyter. (1985). Joseph, J. E. Language and Politics. Edinburgh University Press. (2006). Ricento, T. & Burnaby, B. Language and Politics in the United States and Canada. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (1998). Tatalovich, R. Nativism Reborn? : The Official English Language Movement and the American States. University Press of Kentucky. (1995). Citrin, J. â€Å"Language politics and American identity. † Public Interest. (1990): p96-109. Feder, J. â€Å"English as the Official Language of the United States: Legal Background and Analysis of Legislation in the 110th Congress. † CRS Report for Congress. (January 25, 2007): pp18. Li, P. S. â€Å"The Economics of Minority Language Identity. † Canadian Ethnic Studies. (2001):