What level of English Speaking Skills Should be Required of New Citizens?
As the immigration debate moves forward, a common mantra across the spectrum is that illegal immigrants (and possibly citizens) would have to learn English to become naturalized. The question is, what level of English is required? The naturalization law clearly states that individuals must read, write, and speak English before becoming naturalized U.S. citizens. As a former director of a citizenship program back in mid-1990s, I can verify that the Clinton administration's standard didn't go beyond answering a few set questions in English and writing two sample sentences that were dictated.
The most common sentences were "I love the U.S." and "My family lives in the U.S." Wow! What standards! But the ruse worked, and over six million folks became naturalized before the 1996 election. Of course, the new citizens were overwhelming Democrat… and were concentrated in five key states: California, New York, Illinois, Florida, and Texas. Clinton won re-election, many Republicans cried foul, and immigration became even more politicized. Eventually, Congress ordered new standards. PriceWaterhouse did a study to revise and modernize the naturalization system.
So what does the Obama administration plan? The preliminary indications are not much better than the Clinton standard. (For historical perspective, immigrants after WWII had to write two long essays on a principle of the government or historical event.) Here's another question: will the next immigration bill include a minimum number of classroom hours of instruction in English? The amnesty bill of 1986 required 40 hours of classroom instruction. What will the 2009 bill require? If the answer is anything less than 100 hours, then you know that moving millions of immigrants to a fast track toward citizenship has a higher priority than maintaining English as a common language. Is that a good idea? Perhaps not.
First, the failure to mandate English classes will hand immigration opponents a huge advantage. Let's be clear: every new United States citizen should be able to read a USA Today newspaper article, fill out a job application, understand safety warnings, talk to their co-workers, discuss their children's grades with their teachers, take a driver's license test, respond to a police officer's questions, and describe their medical problems in English. Second, increasing English speaking skills for immigrants won't happen overnight. We need to dramatically increase the incentives and opportunities for immigrants to improve their speaking skills by opening more English as a Second language classes in churches, schools, and community centers.
After all, if we want to enforce higher standards for future citizens we must first create open more adult school classrooms. English has become the common global language for business, culture, and research. It's reasonable to ask new American citizens to actually speak the common language. It is disheartening to know that a measly $400 million has been appropriated for one full year of Adult Education needs. That looks like a state budget - for such a Herculean task. Rep. Raul Grijalva, a democrat from Arizona, is asking his fellow members in the House of Representatives to co-sign a letter that will be sent to appropriators asking for:
$750 million for funding under Title II of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA)
$850 million for funding under Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
That makes a lot of sense in terms of allocation of funds for two different areas of concern. The Obama administration will also have to provide far more funding in the future to make comprehensive immigration reform popular.
What about those adults who are the bread winners but are still not comfortable with English as a medium of expression? As the Obama administration begins pushing for a new citizenship bill which will face considerable political opposition, it should prepare the immigrant advocates for the probability of higher English speaking standards. Some sort of mandatory classroom attendance, especially for healthy workers, seems likely. Of course, the tests will also have to flexible for the disabled and seniors who face more hurdles in learning a new language.
Joseph Conrad, who learned English as a fourth language, stated "English saved my life." Shouldn't we give every naturalization candidate the same chance to realize their potential and learn English before joining our national family?
As the immigration debate moves forward, a common mantra across the spectrum is that illegal immigrants (and possibly citizens) would have to learn English to become naturalized. The question is, what level of English is required? The naturalization law clearly states that individuals must read, write, and speak English before becoming naturalized U.S. citizens. As a former director of a citizenship program back in mid-1990s, I can verify that the Clinton administration's standard didn't go beyond answering a few set questions in English and writing two sample sentences that were dictated.
The most common sentences were "I love the U.S." and "My family lives in the U.S." Wow! What standards! But the ruse worked, and over six million folks became naturalized before the 1996 election. Of course, the new citizens were overwhelming Democrat… and were concentrated in five key states: California, New York, Illinois, Florida, and Texas. Clinton won re-election, many Republicans cried foul, and immigration became even more politicized. Eventually, Congress ordered new standards. PriceWaterhouse did a study to revise and modernize the naturalization system.
So what does the Obama administration plan? The preliminary indications are not much better than the Clinton standard. (For historical perspective, immigrants after WWII had to write two long essays on a principle of the government or historical event.) Here's another question: will the next immigration bill include a minimum number of classroom hours of instruction in English? The amnesty bill of 1986 required 40 hours of classroom instruction. What will the 2009 bill require? If the answer is anything less than 100 hours, then you know that moving millions of immigrants to a fast track toward citizenship has a higher priority than maintaining English as a common language. Is that a good idea? Perhaps not.
First, the failure to mandate English classes will hand immigration opponents a huge advantage. Let's be clear: every new United States citizen should be able to read a USA Today newspaper article, fill out a job application, understand safety warnings, talk to their co-workers, discuss their children's grades with their teachers, take a driver's license test, respond to a police officer's questions, and describe their medical problems in English. Second, increasing English speaking skills for immigrants won't happen overnight. We need to dramatically increase the incentives and opportunities for immigrants to improve their speaking skills by opening more English as a Second language classes in churches, schools, and community centers.
After all, if we want to enforce higher standards for future citizens we must first create open more adult school classrooms. English has become the common global language for business, culture, and research. It's reasonable to ask new American citizens to actually speak the common language. It is disheartening to know that a measly $400 million has been appropriated for one full year of Adult Education needs. That looks like a state budget - for such a Herculean task. Rep. Raul Grijalva, a democrat from Arizona, is asking his fellow members in the House of Representatives to co-sign a letter that will be sent to appropriators asking for:
$750 million for funding under Title II of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA)
$850 million for funding under Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
That makes a lot of sense in terms of allocation of funds for two different areas of concern. The Obama administration will also have to provide far more funding in the future to make comprehensive immigration reform popular.
What about those adults who are the bread winners but are still not comfortable with English as a medium of expression? As the Obama administration begins pushing for a new citizenship bill which will face considerable political opposition, it should prepare the immigrant advocates for the probability of higher English speaking standards. Some sort of mandatory classroom attendance, especially for healthy workers, seems likely. Of course, the tests will also have to flexible for the disabled and seniors who face more hurdles in learning a new language.
Joseph Conrad, who learned English as a fourth language, stated "English saved my life." Shouldn't we give every naturalization candidate the same chance to realize their potential and learn English before joining our national family?
