Sigh.
I've been hearing on the news since yesterday and reading in today's papers that the estimate for the special election costs to vote on the English First amendment to our Metro Nashville Charter has now soared to $500,000. The potential cost makes one gag in light of the general financial crisis we as a nation are going through.
Personally, I wanna know where this all comes from; why Crafton started this whole thing.
Were you walking down the Metro Council hallways one day and somebody said something in another language and that made you upset? Did someone actually have a side conversation in another language during a Metro Council meeting? What happened? I just want to understand why this came up out of the blue like it has and why you seem to spend so much time and now are spending our hard earned money willy-nilly on it, especially after you
said you wouldn't push for a special election.
Putting aside the incredible redundancy of the proposed amendment -- since the State of Tennessee
already recognizes English as the
state language -- now that we Nashville taxpayers have been obligated to this outrageous special election costs by the pushy tactics of one Councilman, we should carefully examine what this amendment actually
says in the way Crafton has currently written it. Because while on the surface it
looks like the amendment is "defending" the right of Metro Nashville Government to continue to conduct Nashville business in English (like it already does) it in fact does not achieve that. The League of Women Voters of Nashville has
just one of the checklists as to why it doesn't work.
According to the article by Nate Rau over at
The City Paper, this is what Councilman Crafton said about his amendment:
“Me wanting to make English the government’s official language for all the boards, commissions, Council meetings, any action that binds the city, is a unifying factor. We’re going to be one community and we’re not going to prefer one immigrant community over another,” he said. “That’s a unifying factor, it’s not racially motivated.”So let's see what the amendment actually says in the June 5th,
The City Paper version:
“No person shall have a right to government services in any other language. All meetings of the Metro Council, Boards and Commissions of the Metropolitan Government shall be conducted in English. Nothing in this measure shall be interpreted to conflict with federal or state law.”Here is the amendment in an August 14th version, quoted by the
Hispanic Nashville blog:
"English is the official language of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee. Official actions (those which bind or commit the government) shall be taken only in the English language, and all official government communications and publications shall be published only in English. No person shall have a right to government services in any other language. All meetings of the Metro Council, Boards, and Commissions of the Metropolitan Government shall be conducted in English. Nothing in this measure shall be interpreted to conflict with federal or state law."(Wow. Do we really want Nashville to get re-baptised as "The France of the South?")
This amendment -- as written in either version -- instead of "unifying"as Crafton claims to want to do, will actually hurt all Nashvillians. It in effect rolls away much of the authority Metro Nashville government rightfully
has over its new immigrants, and I'm sure this was
not the effect he was aiming for.
Providing basic translations of certain government services to new immigrants is not about "the rights" of one group over another. On the contrary, providing translations of certain services to new immigrants is about the rights of ALL Nashvillians to assist eachother in living in the city we have all decided to live in.
But until he bothers to explain himself, let's give him the benefit of the doubt -- maybe Councilman Crafton just doesn't realize how poorly written this amendment currently is. Maybe that's the problem. He sees the "big picture" and not what's actually
written. He's so wrapped up in getting supporters behind the rather idea that he didn't bother to properly word the amendment in the first place so he now comes off as hostile to both immigrants and visitors. Perhaps had he
taken the time to write this correctly, then there might be understanding between us all, instead of this weird hostility he's sown.
As it stands, the amendment
removes instead of clarifies, and
diminishes Metro instead of strengthens it. If enacted as is, it means Metro government will not allow itself to translate any of its government business paperwork into any other language. So (just for starters) DMV forms, car registration forms etc., -- all that ancillary government paperwork translated out of courtesy to new immigrants so they can conduct their proper business as they learn English -- will no longer be in other languages other than English.
So what's wrong with that, you say? They have to learn English, you say. It makes no sense, I say. English is not absorbed by osmosis, it is
learned. (And on a larger scale, anyone remember being taught about
the Rosetta stone back in High School?)
It then makes no sense that Metro should cut back on its authority over its new immigrant citizens by
not providing translations for certain services. Why would we cut back on our authority? Metro has to make this basic paperwork available in other languages so people can do the right and legal thing when they get here.
Immigration and illegal immigration, and the English First amendment are very separate though interconnected/intermingled issues. (As are the issues of dealing with con men and lazy people, since we will find legal and illegal examples of both quite easily.) Each issue has to be examined within its own context, and then weighed with and against the other issues each one affects and is affected by, so we can make right decisions together as a society. We have to use Wisdom, compassion and justice with each other. For now let's just weigh in on the proposed amendment and the way it's written first.
Like I was saying, this amendment doesn't actually refine the Metro Nashville Charter. In practice this amendment as written will in fact decrease the authority of the government using the Charter. It will, by not reaching out to immigrants, undermine the authority of Metro through failing to provide translations, it will not make its new immigrant citizens accountable to Metro -- like all the rest of its citizens are -- and making Metro in turn accountable to its citizens, regardless of origin.
Why is this?
Let me put it this way. A bilingual person has the advantage of knowing two languages, and thus is able to communicate to a larger group of people. The key words here are "communicate" and "larger group". Being bilingual is an asset, it's not a shameful thing. Knowing more than one language is an asset in this world that is becoming so small. We should not be surprised at this. However, while we may know more than one language, our local and National agreed-upon main language for across-the-board communication is English. It's what makes America America, right?
Let me put it another way. A new immigrant has arrived and has made Nashville their home. They are learning English, working, paying their way. This new immigrant sees a crime committed against a fellow Nashvillian. They report it to the police, like they know is the right thing to do. But the "English First" people are telling me that the police department and legal department are not obligated to and should
not provide an interpretor to help the witness aide the victim? Worse than that, you are telling me the witness
should pay for the interpretor? (P.S. This is
another amendment Crafton is working on.) Isn't this plainly creating a situation for the greater harm?
Again, it makes no sense I say. Isn't this government elected to serve its people?
So we know the language of the state of Tennessee and of Nashville is English. That's a "duh" to U.S. native and U.S. immigrant alike.
So while our agreed-upon main language is English, I do think we can further agree that a government willing to translate enough of its vital information in order to help a new immigrant integrate into its society is a government acting in a wise and benevolent manner. We must in effect
mentor our new citizens. The translation of paperwork and basic services of ordinary citizen-obligations (say of drivers licenses, etc.) so immigrants can fill them out is only to help them to know the basics of what's expected of them as a citizen in the new society they've decided to join. This is a courtesy, and it's just enough so that they can adjust. They're obligated to learn the local language to further adjust in order to properly survive, really.
It's not very complicated or odd, is it? Translations are just
necessary.
We cannot as citizens take one hundred steps back and use this amendment as it is worded now. The language as it stands will eliminate all proper use of translated languages that simply bridges the gap between immigrant/potential citizen and citizen. The elimination of such services would be harmful to
all of us. This amendment as currently worded will move far more quickly to establish a far more vast illegal immigrant underground that will never integrate into Nashville society at all, just because it would be impossible for them to do so. And isn't that exactly what you were trying to avoid, Mr. Crafton? Where is the unity in that?
If you want people to come into Nashville, pay their taxes and make their legit way we
have to reach out to them and help them to integrate. Being mean-spirited does not achieve that. They're going to stop driving because they don't have a license because they can't fill out the paperwork? Please. People gotta survive, and they are already here. Get them to integrate properly and to be legal, in a mature and compassionate way.
We are not coddling them by providing thesese services. However we
must make the local rules clear and make it possible for them to join in and LEARN and work their part. They'll do it. Just don't make it impossible for them to do so.
Immigration and illegal immigration aside, we still must remember many of these immigrants are refugees from corrupt governments and war-torn countries whose governments give them no assistance in arriving here legally. It is up to us who are here to turn the situation around and make it possible for them to integrate. These are no longer the convenient days of one nice gateway called Ellis Island where everyone arrives here by boat and gets "checked in".
Frankly, we were all immigrants once, no matter how far back on the family tree we need to look. Current immigrants also just want someplace safe to live and will live legally by the common rules
if we can respect each other's right to live. (Again,
criminals are
another story and we have plenty of
legal citizen criminals for starters.) We do need a reasonable if small amount of government paperwork duly translated in order to scoop immigrants in and get them legalized. I don't see what's so hard to understand, and why Mr. Crafton insists on being hostile in his defense of this English First amendment. Now that we're stuck on having to vote on it, the way it's written now it's just
not going to work in Metro's favor, or in ours (as Nashvillians).
HOWEVER, again, let's give Mr. Crafton the benefit of the doubt. Let's presume he just wasn't paying attention and didn't realize how poorly written his amendment really was. Let's re-read his original intention as he stated, and try this idea on for size:
We conduct government business here in the United States, in Tennessee, in English. MAYBE Crafton meant that he wants to move beyond the
presumption of using English within the good city of Nashville, and his intention was instead to (simply and redundantly) clarify the specific Metro charter in order to specifically add that all Metro Government business meetings and resulting Metro business and legal documents concerning the conduct of Metro government business at the Metro offices shall be done only in English -- the official language of the state of Tennessee and thus of Metro -- but that government paperwork could be subsequently available in in other languages in translated form to the immigrant citizens of Nashville where appropriate. But if so,
then that would be a different request and a different amendment entirely.
Not the one he has in place now.
That would demand a rewrite of what he has on its way to be voted on. (And another vote after it's re-written correctly, but that's another kvetch for another time.)
But as it stands, we'll be voting on and spending a huge amount of money on a uselessly and incorrectly written amendment that at the very least (to be
extremely kind) needs to be re-written.
If you want to see how important the
proper wording on an amendment is, just check out Amendment #1 which appears on our Nov 4 ballot (you can see it on the sample ballot registered voters are receiving in the mail this week.)
That is
a re-vote on a previously too-vaguely worded amendment we'd all voted on before (in 2006? Been trying to Google it for the link for dates.) Through this current example alone we can see how proper phrasing is WAY important to settle on BEFORE an amendment gets as far as to be voted on by the citizenry.
Anyway. The amendment Crafton has proposed and will have us vote on in January, as currently worded will reduce the authority of Metro Nashville government, and will not achieve the "Nashville unity" Crafton thinks it will. We can plainly see this by the fruits of disharmony that's erupted.
Labels: Local Government, Local News