|
Multilingualism at the Polls:
Opportunity or Insult?
Each election raises questions about multilingual ballots
and voter pamphlets. Orange County’s new computerized
voting system forces voters to choose among five different
languages popping up on the screen.
During the recent Special Election campaign there were
charges of inaccuracies in the Spanish and Korean versions
of the ballot propositions. The publication of those non-English
language voting materials cost OC taxpayers $596,919 for
the 2004 and 2005 elections.
Why are multilingual ballots and voter information required?
In which languages? Are they needed? Do they really help
immigrants or perpetuate negative stereotypes?
The U.S. Justice Dept. enforces and interprets election
rules according to the Voting Rights Act. These vary widely
among America’s 3,066 counties. The Los Angeles County
Registrar of Voters, for example, provides translations
in Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, Japanese and Tagalog.
Whole states with few immigrants, such as Alabama and Maine,
use only English. Here in OC, all materials, voting guides
and ballot arguments must be offered in English, Spanish,
Chinese, Korean and Vietnamese.
Are these materials actually needed? How many voters really
do not understand written English?
Citizenship is required of all voters. Citizens by birth
acquire English either at home or quickly learn it at school.
Kids may become bilingual, but English is easily acquired
while growing up. John Moorlach, for example arrived on
his first day of school speaking only Dutch, but that didn’t
stop him from becoming OC’s most outspoken Treasurer.
In order to vote, prospective citizens must pass a citizenship
test, which is given in English. Immigrants study for months
to prepare for this test, some even enrolling in special
classes—all in English. After all this, they are
fully capable of voting in English.
In fact, the vast majority of immigrants do vote in English.
Of the 1.5 million Orange County voters, only 10,506 requested
non-English ballots in the last election. That’s
0.7% of the total voting population, or just seven of every
1,000 voters.
Multilingualism perpetuates the false stereotype that
immigrants are not learning English, either by lack of
desire or ability. Both stereotypes are wrong. Today’s
naturalized immigrants have higher education and income
levels than in past generations. Two thirds of all OC’s
immigrants have been stateside for over a decade.
Explaining complicated ballot propositions in English
is difficult enough. There have been many legal challenges
over the wording of ballot arguments, some over the use
of a single word. Accurately translating all this material
in five other languages is highly problematic. Chinese
uses over 20,000 characters, with a simplified system (Mainland)
and traditional system (Taiwan, Hong Kong) that are distinctly
different. Not surprisingly, most Chinese-American voters
in Orange County are well-educated professionals who overwhelmingly
vote in English.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 assured African-Americans
their right to vote, which had long been denied in the
Jim Crow South. It was long overdue legislation aimed at
blatant race-based political disenfranchisement. It had
nothing to do with multilingual voting.
It was only in subsequent renewals of the Voting Rights
Act that multilingual ballot requirements crept in, and
these rules have become increasingly aggressive.
The method of determining non-English speaking voters
is highly suspect. On census forms, all of us are asked
how well we speak English. The choices are: Very Well,
Well, Not Well or Not at All. All who check “Well” are
automatically labeled as “Limited-English.” Only
a “Very Well” answer is considered fluent.
Speaking English “Well” should be good enough.
It was obviously good enough to pass the citizenship test!
In addition, all adults who have not finished the 5th
Grade (like Abraham Lincoln?) are presumed to be illiterate.
When more than 5% or 10,000 of the voting age population
of a county meet these criteria, the non-English ballot
requirements take effect.
Such confusing rules are subject to wide interpretation.
Last year, the Justice Dept. required the Registrar to
send “outreach” letters to 118,856 foreign-born
voters offering non-English voting materials, at a cost
of $14,262. We got hundreds of angry responses from voters
insulted by the County’s request.
Justice Dept. officials may soon require all voter pamphlets
to contain all five languages—even those sent to
native English speakers. This would cost the county over
$20 million per election, incite anti-immigrant feelings,
and give the voter pamphlet the bulk of a phone book. They
also threaten to add Tagalog, one of the two official languages
of the Philippines. The other official Philippine language
is English, which virtually all Filipino immigrants speak
fluently.
Republicans used to blame liberals for such misguided
programs. No more. We have the power to change them. Local
Congressmen Royce, Miller, Rohrabacher and Calvert have
all expressed their support for relief. The Voting Rights
Act is up for renewal next year. These costly, divisive
and unnecessary requirements must be changed.
|
