[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 163 (Friday, October 20, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1988-E1989]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      THE BILINGUAL EDUCATION TRAP

                                 ______


                             HON. TOBY ROTH

                              of wisconsin

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, October 19, 1995

  Mr. ROTH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call the attention of my 
colleagues to a column that appeared yesterday in the Wall Street 
Journal. The author, Michael Gonzalez, makes a compelling case against 
bilingual education and for preserving our common bond, the English 
language.
  Mr. Gonzalez' article shares his personal experience with bilingual 
education programs as a new American growing up in New York City. His 
story is a cautionary tale of bureaucratic excess and educational 
ineffectiveness. Rather than helping children learn English, the 
bilingual education programs he describes actually hold them back.
  A recent surveys showed that in just 5 years, there will be 40 
million Americans who can't speak English. Those Americans will be 
isolated, cut off from realizing the American dream, if they don't have 
the one skill that is required for success in America: fluency in 
English.
  We should heed the warnings of people like Michael Gonzalez, who have 
experienced the 

[[Page E1989]]
negative effects of bilingual education first hand. I have introduced 
legislation that would end these misguided Government programs and 
shift our educational focus back to teaching new Americans English 
quickly and effectively. I hope you will join me in this effort by 
cosponsoring H.R. 739, the Declaration of Official Language Act.
  I ask that the full text of Mr. Gonzalez' article appear in the 
Record at this point.

             [From the Wall Street Journal, Oct. 18, 1995]

                         The Bilingual Ed Trap

                         (By Michael Gonzalez)

       The push to make English the official language of the U.S. 
     misses the point. If proponents of such a constitutional 
     amendment aim to prevent Balkanization and preserve the ideal 
     of the melting pot, they would do far better to channel their 
     efforts into radically changing bilingual education programs. 
     Immigrants will learn English if the social engineers will 
     only let them.
       I know about bilingual education first-hand. When my family 
     came to this country from Cuba via Spain more than 20 years 
     ago, the New York City public school system, in its infinite 
     wisdom, put me in a bilingual program, despite my family's 
     doubts. The program delayed my immersion into English, 
     created an added wedge between new immigrants and other 
     students, and was sometimes used as a dumping ground for 
     troubled Spanish-speakers more fluent in English.
       When I tried to transfer to a regular class, the system 
     threw roadblocks in my way. Administrators finally relented, 
     though it took a lot to convince them. The process was an 
     education in itself, but it wasn't one a 14-year-old should 
     be asked to go through.
       One year later, the students who had stayed in the 
     bilingual class were still there, and their English-language 
     skills were little improved. They were every bit as bright as 
     I; it was the system that held them back. Sadly, this picture 
     has not improved in the past two decades.
       While a bilingual program of short duration that truly aims 
     at quick immersion in the English-speaking culture would be 
     of value, the lobbying groups that support bilingual 
     education appear to have other aims in mind: chiefly, pushing 
     the Spanish language as something in need of protection and 
     creating a multicultural, multilingual nation.
       Spanish is my native tongue, and it is the native tongue of 
     every member of my family. I work hard at not losing it and 
     speak it as often as I can, especially in the street. It is 
     beautiful, melodious tongue, especially suitable for poetry 
     and other forms of literature. It is not a waif that needs 
     the help of some concerned administrator. The language is 
     alive and duly celebrated in Spain and 18 countries in Latin 
     America, as well as in any other country where individuals 
     have chosen to add it to the particular inventory of the 
     foreign languages they know.
       Paul Hill, research professor at the University of 
     Washington's graduate school of public policy, says one 
     hidden agenda of bilingualism's proponents may be to create 
     demand for teachers who speak a foreign language. He also 
     suggest a more Machiavellian agenda: Instilling in a child a 
     self-consciousness as a member of a separate group virtually 
     ensures that he or she will never fully feel a member of the 
     larger society and will be more vulnerable to claims of 
     ethnic pride, or resentment, by politicians and marketers 
     alike. I fear Prof. Hill may be right on target.
       As a correspondent, I have witnessed countries such as 
     South Korea and Japan use unity of purpose to compete 
     globally. I have also witnessed strife in countries that are 
     multilingual and multicultural, such as Afghanistan and 
     Cyprus. We should think twice before we toss out the corny 
     goal of having a melting pot.
       Yes, Americans, an English-speaking people, had better 
     start learning foreign languages, such as Spanish, in order 
     to better compete in the world. Yes, our diversity is a real 
     strength: Americans of Eastern European, Asian and Latin 
     American background are leading the charge in opening markets 
     in those regions. But we cannot afford to become dissipated 
     at the center--we have to understand one another, 
     linguistically and culturally, back at the head office.
       But if the liberals on one side confuse matters, the 
     conservatives on the other side also send the wrong message 
     with English-only drives. The first law that established 
     English as the official language of a state, in Nebraska in 
     the 1920s, restricted the learning of any other foreign 
     language until secondary education. Any law that risks 
     encouraging isolationism should be opposed. Globalism is 
     real--anyone who doubts it should visit our business schools 
     and see students grappling with how to overcome America's 
     natural seclusion. In addition, if it's fair to speculate 
     about the motives of bilingual-ed supporters, it is also 
     legitimate to hypothesize that supporters of English-only may 
     be animated by nativism, racism and ignorance.
       Far from working toward union, making English an official 
     language risks creating further divisions. It goes against 
     the grain of how things have traditionally been done in this 
     country, where there is no official religion nor family that 
     represents the state. Reforming bilingual ed and restricting 
     government literature to English does not require an official 
     language. We've done without one for 219 years. We don't need 
     one now.

                          ____________________