In Plain English

Voter enactment of Proposition 63, the initiative declaring English the state’s official language, must not blind Californians to the reality of their multilingual state. Simply passing new laws does not change what people do in their day-to-day lives, so the need to use languages other than English will not end.

We think that a majority of California residents voted for Proposition 63 because it seemed to be a safe and logical proposal, not because they fear that the primacy of English is somehow threatened. Unfortunately, some of the backers of Proposition 63 intend to try to terminate any public use of foreign languages that they consider improper or unnecessary.

That’s a losing battle that will be costly, divisive and pointless. For example, people who are dubious about experiments in bilingual education in public schools, and want to end them by using Proposition 63, will be stymied by U.S. Supreme Court decisions that mandate bilingual education. The same will happen if they try to eliminate multi-lingual ballots and voting materials, which are required by federal voting-rights laws.

For similar reasons, the legal-aid groups that opposed the initiative should not panic now and try to have it declared unconstitutional. The sponsors of Proposition 63 would only come back with another initiative that could be worse, and would certainly be more divisive. It would be wiser for the groups to challenge, on a case-by-case basis, any extreme or fallacious efforts to dictate English as the language of the land.

English is the language of the land, but not because the state insists on it. It is used so widely because people, including those born in foreign countries, find it practical, necessary and, eventually, comfortable. Those are compelling reasons. They are the reasons people need to speak and write in English. They are also good arguments against using Proposition 63 to launch needless crusades.