Tulsa World

English-Only Plan Draws Heat
By GINNIE GRAHAM, World Staff Writer

Despite a ground swell of support to make English Oklahoma's official language, minority leaders are calling the move offensive and detrimental to basic services for immigrants.

Organizers say more than 100,000 signatures have been gathered on an initiative petition to declare English the authoritative language and ban state money from being spent to provide documents and services in other languages.

Advocates of the English-only proposal say it would mandate a common language and encourage immigrants to assimilate into the American culture.

Chad Smith, principal chief of the Cherokee Nation, spoke out against the measure at a meeting of the American Indian Chamber of Commerce of Oklahoma Thursday in Tulsa.

Smith said the law "personally offends" him for the symbolic nature of ignoring the American Indian history in the state.

He points out that the state name is a Choctaw word and tribal languages were the prevalent vocabularies for centuries before European immigration.

"It's a bit comical considering Oklahoma is Choctaw," Smith said.

Several American Indian tribes are working to preserve native languages, once banned by the government.

Smith said the proposal is a swipe at current immigration and it would tear down the promotion of cultural diversity.

"Our language has given us fortitude, determination and strength through the trials and tribulations of many years," Smith said.

The Hispanic population may become the largest minority group in the nation within the next five years because of recent trends in immigration.

Figures from the census and various agency leaders show Tulsa County has experienced a 255 percent rise in its Hispanic population in the past 10 years.

Some state documents are being provided in Spanish, such as health department vaccine information and tax forms.

Interpreting services in various languages are used occasionally in situations such as court proceedings.

The law would prohibit state money from being spent on translations of documents or interpreters for government services.

The exception listed is to teach foreign languages in schools or to promote English proficiency for immigrant students, such as the English as a Second Language program.

"We are pulling out the safety net for people who can't make it," said Sebastian Lantos, member of the Coalition of Hispanic Organizations.

"Why do we have to get to a constitutional question about what we can and cannot provide as translations?" Lantos asked. "Why can't we just say that English is our common language and has to be taught to help people advance?"

The proposal states that money saved by not printing translations or furnishing interpreters would be spent to provide additional English proficiency programs.

The amount of money to be saved and details of how to redistribute the money are not included in the proposal.

The national organization U.S. English has been a force behind the measure, proposed by state Sen. Carol Martin, R-Comanche, and Rep. Ron Kirby, D-Lawton.

Tim Shultz, spokesman for U.S. English, said the intent is to help immigrants and create better communication between government and the public.

"What we want to make clear to the immigrant community is that the list of exemptions in the initiative are not exhaustive," Shultz said. "The goal is not to remove funding, but place funding in ways to teach immigrants English.

"The intent is not to exempt common-sense objections to the rule. In these types of laws, common sense tends to prevail."

Ralph Morita, a board member for the Asian American Community Center, said non-profit agencies already teach English to immigrants, but the learning curve takes time.

"We have some individuals in our community who think immigrants must learn English now," Morita said. "That's impossible to do . . . This will not change anything except to politicize it and take away funding."

Kathy Jekel of the executive legislative division of the Secretary of State's Office said it is "highly unlikely" the measure would be ready by November because of the time required to verify the signatures.

The petitioners need to collect 69,887 signatures from registered state voters by Aug. 8.

The signatures will be counted by the Secretary of State's Office and forwarded to the state Supreme Court.

The court will determine the sufficiency of the numbers and hold hearings on any appeals or protests to the count, signatures or petition.

A similar process occurs in the state Attorney General's Office on the ballot title. Then, the secretary of state and governor set an election.

Opponents want to make sure the people signing the petition understand the funding aspect, said Yolanda Charney, co-convener of the Coalition of Hispanic Organizations.

"People do not understand the details and the egregious language in the petition when they sign it," Charney said.

Of the 24 states that have passed English-only laws, one (Arizona) was overturned by its district and supreme courts, and two (Alabama and Alaska) were struck down in federal courts and are pending on appeal.