November 27, 2007

Pelosi Endangers National Security, Law Enforcement, Space Exploration

All in an effort to pander to a minority of lawmakers.

Should the Salvation Army be able to require its employees to speak English? You wouldn't think that's controversial. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is holding up a $53 billion appropriations bill funding the FBI, NASA and Justice Department solely to block an attached amendment, passed by both the Senate and House, that protects the charity and other employers from federal lawsuits over their English-only policies.

The U.S. used to welcome immigrants while at the same time encouraging assimilation. Since 1906, for example, new citizens have had to show "the ability to read, write and speak ordinary English." A century later, this preference for assimilation is still overwhelmingly popular. A new Rasmussen poll finds that 87% of voters think it "very important" that people speak English in the U.S., with four out of five Hispanics agreeing. And 77% support the right of employers to have English-only policies, while only 14% are opposed.

So the policy she is blocking is overwhelmingly supported by most Americans, including most Hispanic Americans. But Nancy needs teh support of a few key legislators to impose her partisan agenda, and they don't care what the American people want. As a result, a measure with bipartisan support may not be enacted -- and with it, funds for crucial programs are being delayed.

I'm curious -- what does Slick Nick Lampson have to say about this mess -- he of the strongly pro-Pelosi voting record despite representing a strongly Republican district? And what does prominent local blogger and NASA employee John Cobarruvias have to say? Or will they remain mute, continuing to be partisan yap dogs doing the bidding of their mistress?

Posted by: Greg at 11:34 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 300 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I have a suggestion ... instead of "English Only" how about "English Always" ? Here is what I mean: Have you ever seen a Spanish language publication and wondered what the title/headline means? Have you ever driven by a business with signage in Russian/Korean/Arabic etc and not had a clue what they were selling? Why is that OK? Certainly I understand that merchants in Chinatown are going to advertise in Chinese because of the many local residents who are more comfortable in their native language. That's cool. But doesn't such "Chinese Only" advertising discriminate against English speaking consumers? I propose a law be created that requires: (1) all non-English commercial signage (of any size) to include English translations in a reasonably sized subscript [some sort of % of the original text size]; (2) all non-English publications must have English translations of headlines, titles, chapter names, and captions; and (3) all non-English broadcasts should have English subtitles/2nd-Audio per whatever the same rules are that currently support these features in the other direction. Such a law will have two powerful benefits: (A) it will encourage the use of English in all commercial settings thus opening the door for potential customers that otherwise would avoid such businesses due to the language barrier, and (B) increase the opportunity for non-English speakers to be exposed to English words for familiar products thus expanding their ability to shop at English speaking businesses.

Posted by: Low Sea at Wed Nov 28 19:11:47 2007 (f8Vkn)

2 No, I don't support the Quebec solution. Nor do I support a government ban on the use of languages other than English. What i support is all government business being conducted in English, and employers being able to determine that only English will be spoken in the workplace. Nothing more, nothing less.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Wed Nov 28 22:11:06 2007 (mOx/o)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
8kb generated in CPU 0.0041, elapsed 0.0116 seconds.
21 queries taking 0.0085 seconds, 31 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
[/posts]