"English Only" and the Winning Alliance

Former Clinton Advisor, Dick Morris has an expression regarding political races: "They often go for the low hanging fruit."

In many ways settling for "low hanging fruit" may characterize the current efforts to make English the official language in the United States.

According to Washington D.C. based foundation, U.S. English, 87% of Americans favor making English the official language in the country. Opponents include familiar Senate obstructionist, Chuck Schumer and MSNBC pundit, Rachael Maddow. But these are minority voices. Ask the average man on the street and he'll tell you one of two things: (a) Absolutely or (b) I thought English already was the official language.

With such an overwhelming percentage of Americans favoring English as the official language, why does it seem to be taking forever to get it made into law. A quick study of H.R. 997 will provide insight. Such a process, even for a bill that has this level of support, isn't easy to get through out system. There are committees and sub-committees. Former Pro-English Director, Jayne Cannava can tell you about committees.

Then there are stubborn House Speakers and Senate Majority leaders such as Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. They will do anything possible to keep it from coming to a floor vote. At present, HR 997 looks to be on it's way to passage in the Boehner House. But, the chances of Harry Reid allowing it to come to a floor vote in the Senate are slim and none. The best hope will be to wait until 2013, in anticipation of sufficient Republican Senate victories to replace Reid as Majority leader.

This looks entirely possible. Odds are, Republicans will retake the Senate this November, albeit by a narrow margin. That should take care of it, right? Not so fast!

The opposition to this measure is small but obviously motitvated. Why are they committed to keeping English from becoming the official language? Their answer is the desire for "diversity." Their catch phrase is "lean forward."

Reinforcements are obviously needed!

In previous posts, possible coalitons have been evaluated. Yet, at least one D.C. foundation, U.S. English, wants no part of a coalition with advocates for either immigration reform, identity theft or voter fraud. Pro-English has experienced some turnover and may want to see what happens with HR 997. English First, the third foundation reportedly suffered the loss of a key member and is thought to be regrouping. Nobody knows for certain.

Make no mistake! All foundations have made slow but steady progress at the state level. This is constitutionally the correct approach. But nobody is satisfied to limit the effort to state legislatures.

The proposed "American English Unification Amendment" introduced in "E" is for English goes for the home run! Not only does it mandate English as the official language, it makes it unlawful to use any language but English in everything from drivers license testing to the voting booths. It goes a step further by forcing anyone who wants to participate in the electoral process to learn English! This would amount to a voter identification card, complete with picture and thumb print. Not to mention passage of a fourth grade English proficiency test.

At first glance it would appear that the Tea Parties nationwide would run with it. After all, the savings that would result from English only voting ballots and English only drivers license testing would be astonishing! It would come at a time when Democrats were recommending "shared sacrifice" as in, a tax, while Republicans were countering with the need for "austerity measure." In other words, cuts to benefits and entitlements.

This third alternative would amount to "savings that would come from eliminating previous mandates." Sounds practical. Most Americans would unquestionably like this choice as compared to the first two options. So, what's the problem?

It is called "special interest inertia." Any legislation that eliminates a problem will always have those who stand to lose. Who they are and what they would lose is a topic for another discussion. We'll just leave it at,"this kind of change would cost some people a lot of money."

In other words, we've got a fight on our hands!

By throwing in the identity theft measures that are included in this proposed amendment, you are creating a double objective. When you make it illegal to "outsource jobs offshore that use all or part of an Americans' social security number," you are descibing a measure that everyone understands. The appropriate position is to link the measure to Patriotism. When people become aware of the extent of the practice, they first become alarmed, then angry. The end result question is "how many jobs would be returning to our shores?"

Identity theft in itself, is a separate issue and a winning issue for aspiring politicians. It is the fastest growing crime in America. Most ask, "why are we not hearing more about it?" Same reason: money for a select few!

Think that we need more? I do! And there is no issue that has drawn more criticism and scrutiny than Immigration Reform. The proposed legislation introduced in the "American English Unification Amendment" is the ultimate "bridge for the moderates." It deals with all of the key questions; ranging from "those here illegally through no fault of the own," to "who we should preference for future immigration."

Neither those on the far right or those on the far left will like this proposal. But, as American Foundation for Immigration Control spokesman, John Vinson described, "it's simply common sense." Best of all, it makes English literacy and assimilation part of the equation. Thus, when Chuck Schumers of the world attempt to block English only legislation, they become "opponents of a path to citizenship for illegal aliens and proponents of continued identity theft" in America.

Immigration reform, identity theft and voter fraud are all key needs areas in the country. Also needed are painless methods to cut expenses without compromising benefits or imposing another tax on our people. Coupled with improved literacy which naturally will come from an "English first" standard, we will significantly better our nation by "going for the home run."

Why English only measures have not already passed is a mystery. The bulk of the population wants it. Those opposing it are typically linked to some kind of special interest. It would seem that settling for the "low hanging fruit" would be be a waste.

The desire to make English the official language could be the ultimate catalyst for solving other concerns. Most importantly, such an alliance would make possible a "power move" on any and all who would advocate a weaker America.