By Bob Gibson
Daily Progress political blogger
Del. L. Scott Lingamfelter, R-Woodbridge, is looking for a little help in the path to make his House Bill 55, which he introduced last week, into a law that would again designate English the official language of Virginia.
While the legislation looks more like an attempt to stop the state from using other languages unless someone is sick, in school or in court, Lingamfelter responded to a query about the bill by saying he is open to suggestions.
Fellow bloggers, I say suggest away. Lend us your ears, your fears, your suggested amendments or fates for this bill.
My e-mail to Lingamfelter asked, “Scott, What’s the purpose of your new House Bill 55? I didn’t know the state was doing a lot of stuff in foreign languages.“
His response: “Bob, I just didn’t want legitimate foreign language instruction in schools to be impacted…may not be necessary but I put it in initially…I’m open to suggestions. Scott”
Should the state write more English, or better English, or any kind of official English restrictions on the use of other languages into the Code of Virginia?
Should the state stop speaking in foreign tongues?
Would barring the state from speaking in other tongues violate anyone’s freedom of religion?
Page 1 of 1
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( ) on December 13, 2007 at 10:59 am
English has been the official language of the Commonwealth and all of its localities since 1996 (made a mistake in my last post and said 1994).
In significant respects, this legislation resembles efforts by state legislatures to ban the teaching of German in the interim between WWI and WWII. The US Supreme Court overturned Nebraska’s version in 1923:
“The desire of the Legislature to foster a homogeneous people with American ideals prepared readily to understand current discussions of civic matters is easy to appreciate. Unfortunate experiences during the late war and aversion toward every character of truculent adversaries were certainly enough to quicken that aspiration. But the means adopted, we think, exceed the limitations upon the power of the state and conflict with rights assured to plaintiff in error. The interference is plain enough and no adequate reason therefor in time of peace and domestic tranquility has been shown. ... As the statute undertakes to interfere only with teaching which involves a modern language, leaving complete freedom as to other matters, there seems no adequate foundation for the suggestion that the purpose was to protect the child’s health by limiting his mental activities. It is well known that proficiency in a foreign language seldom comes to one not instructed at an early age, and experience shows that this is not injurious to the health, morals or understanding of the ordinary child.“
If we are to be competitive in the global economy, we need to be encouraging every child in Virginia to become proficient in more than one language rather than celebrating America’s monolingualism as a positive civic value.
The facts show that the current generation of immigrants will, as their forebears did, struggle with becoming fully bi-lingual. Their children and their children’s children will move from bilingualism to the dominant American reality—unilingualism.
As I’ve said before, this legislation is simply a message bill that says to everyone whose first language is other than English “you are not welcome in Virginia.“
Support for this proposal makes a liar out of anyone who claims that they are anti-illegal immigrant and not simply anti-immigrant.
Report Inappropriate Comment