The most vocal opponents of Utah's Official English Initiative are people who already have the skills to read and understand English. Unfortunately, too often it seems they fail to make use of those skills before they speak out on the issue.
For example, state Sen. Pete Suazo was in the news recently after introducing what he calls the "English Plus" resolution.One of the claims in the resolution is that "Whereas, Utah was part of Mexico until the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo of 1845 wherein the United States insured protection of former Mexican citizens, made United States residents by the treaty, and protected their linguistic rights to continue to speak Spanish . . . "
This has concerned many legislators, as they properly would not want to violate a treaty, but apparently Sen. Suazo's staff did not bother to actually read the text of the treaty (or to check the date it was signed 1848, not 1845) before drafting the resolution.
Back in 1986, when an official English initiative was proposed in California, the California State Attorney General's Office researched the treaty and concluded:
"The treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo contains no mention of either Spanish or English. . . . An examination of the relevant provisions of the Treaty and the case law interpreting them indicates that their purpose was only to ensure that Mexican nationals residing in the ceded territories at the time of the treaty could acquire U.S. citizenship. . . . [The provisions] do not purport to give such persons any rights above those of other U.S. citizens." Office of the Attorney General of California, News Advisory, October 9, 1986.
It appears that most of the opponents of the Official English Initiative have not bothered to actually read the text of the initiative, either. For instance, opponents claim that the Official English Initiative would deny people their right to a fair trial by preventing the use of court translators. But anyone who reads the initiative will find that it specifically allows the government to use other languages "in judicial proceedings, when necessary to insure that justice is served."
Another myth spread by opponents is that the initiative would prevent Salt Lake City from using other languages to deal with the visitors to the 2002 Winter Olympics. Georgia passed an official English law just months before the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, and it caused no problems. Again, simply reading the initiative would show that other languages could be used "to promote and encourage tourism and economic development, including the hosting of international events such as the Olympics."
Others claim that the initiative would discourage the teaching of foreign languages -- a subject very important for Utah schoolchildren. Nothing could be further from the truth. In act, the Official English Initiative explicitly states that the State Board of Education and State Board of Regents should make rules promoting the teaching of foreign languages.
Furthermore, contrary to the claims of those who say this initiative does nothing to help people learn English, the State Board of Education and State Board of Regents are also instructed to promote the principles that "non-English speaking children and adults should become able to read, write and understand English as quickly as possible, [and] formal and informal programs in English as a Second Language should be initiated, continued and expanded."
Utah has a grand tradition of welcoming people from all over the world and binding them together as one people. Utah also has a tradition of preparing to send her sons and daughters to foreign countries. The Legislature has a chance to honor both those traditions, helping those who move to Utah to learn English and promoting the learning of foreign languages -- by passing the Official English Initiative.
Mauro E. Mujica is chairman of the board/CEO of U.S. English Inc.