Thinking About English Only

There are many different reasons to oppose the English Only (English First) amendment to Metro Charter. Here are just a few:

• City leaders have decided overwhelmingly that English-only is bad for Nashville. On August 7    , 2008, the Metro Council voted 25-8 urging voters to oppose an English-only charter amendment. Mayor Dean himself addressed the council: “I wanted to take this time, this opportunity to make sure my voice, as mayor of this city, is heard on this issue, and to assure that everyone fully understands the consequences of passing a law that will tie our hands in the global economy, that will detract from our appeal as an international tourist destination, and that will damage our reputation as a welcoming and friendly city.”
  
• English is already the “official and legal language” of Tennessee. In November of 2006, the Nashville Metro Council passed resolution RS2006-1650, clarifying that TN state law already establishes English as the official language, and expressing concern that further English-only legislation could actually be bad for English acquisition.
• The English-only initiative tells new businesses and students considering Nashville, “foreign people will not be accommodated and are not welcome.” According to the Nashville Chamber of Commerce (which has publicly stated it’s opposition to the amendment), Japanese investment alone in Tennessee exceeded $9.4 billion in 2004, creating over 40,000 jobs.
• The English-only initiative in Nashville has already received negative press on a national scale, with
  publications as far-reaching as USA Today, the Florida Times-Union, the Houston Chronicle, the Las Vegas Sun, the Pittsburgh Tribune Review and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer describing Nashville as a tourist-driven city on the verge of taking an unwelcoming stance toward its visitors and out of touch with the city’s one in six foreign-born residents.
• English-only legislation denies U.S. citizens with limited English proficiency some of their basic rights. For example, naturalization for U.S. citizenship does not require English literacy for people over 50, or people who have been in the U.S. for over 20 years. An ‘English only’ standard prevents legal residents and United States citizens from obtaining important information from their government, and prevents such persons from effectively communicating with or expressing grievances to their elected officials, impinging on First Amendment and Equal Protection rights. The right to receive ideas is essential to an individual’s rights of speech, press and political freedom.
• Metro agencies translate essential documents because it makes Metro government more efficient.  Imposing an artificial language barrier will slow down customer service lines, create confusion and misinformation, and degrade the quality of Metro services for all residents. Metro government should encourage, not discourage, communication between its residents and government employees.