[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 106 (Thursday, August 3, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8845-S8846]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. INHOFE:
  S. 3828. A bill to amend title 4, United States Code, to declare 
English as the official language of the Government of the United 
States, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland Security 
and Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, there are many things we take for granted 
that have made our Nation prosperous. The Founding Fathers spent their 
lives seeking to create a United States of America that could survive 
against the great powers of England, France, and Spain.
  These men knew that America had at least one advantage over the 
European powers: size. President Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase of 1803 
effectively doubled the size of the United States and provided a means 
by which America's inland farmers would have a guaranteed way to ship 
their products to market.
  Even today, the comparison remains striking when you ask, ``How far 
will one gallon of fuel move one ton of freight?''
  One gallon of fuel can move a ton of freight 59 miles by truck and 
386 miles by rail. That same gallon of fuel will move a ton of freight 
by water 522 miles.
  One of the main reasons for the economy of waterborne shipping lies 
in something physics students know as friction and we pilots know as 
drag.
  The more that friction or drag increase, the more that fuel economy 
decreases. There is a lot of friction between a road and a truck. There 
is far less between a ship and a river.
  This simple rule led me to lead the fight for the Water Resources 
Development Act a few days ago. As one of the most fiscally 
conservative Members of this body, I have long argued that the two most 
important functions of the Federal Government are to provide for 
national defense and public infrastructure.
  Efficiency and economics require the Government to not only plan but 
to construct and maintain public infrastructure. Investments in real 
public infrastructure, like waterways and barge canals, create 
economies of scale that have made the American economy a wonder of the 
world.
  My determination to stand up in this Chamber at every opportunity on 
behalf of national defense and public infrastructure is a large part of 
the reason I am introducing legislation today to make English America's 
official language.
  A common means of communication has created one giant market for 
goods and labor from Maine to California. A resident of Tulsa can seek 
work in New Hampshire, Oregon, or Georgia without having to learn a 
second language. A company based in Oklahoma City can readily sell its 
products from Portland, ME, to Los Angeles, CA.
  In Europe, by contrast, a resident of Berlin cannot look for work in 
Paris or

[[Page S8846]]

Warsaw without surmounting considerable language barriers. A German 
company cannot easily sell its products in Madrid, again, in part 
because of the language barrier.
  The European Union is an effort to create a United States-like common 
market in Western Europe, among other things. Europeans are spending 
billions of euros to try to replicate what we Americans have enjoyed 
for free these past 230 years.
  There are too many signs that we are allowing this great advantage of 
an American nation united by a common language to slip through our 
fingers.
  President Bill Clinton created the most radical language policy 6 
years ago when he signed Executive Order--E.O.--13166 on August 11, 
2000.
  E.O. 13166 declared that all recipients of Federal funds had to be 
ready to provide all services in any language anyone wished to speak at 
any time.
  E.O. 13166 means that while Canada has only two official languages 
and the United Nations just six, the United States now has over 200 
official languages.
  Efforts to repeal E.O. 13166 have run aground because of a 
fundamental misunderstanding of what repeal would mean.
  After the debate on my official English amendment, S.A. 4064, to the 
Senate immigration bill, S. 2611, E.J. Dionne, Jr., told readers of the 
May 23 Washington Post that he was still going to pray over his 
children in French. I have only one word to say to Mr. Dionne: relax.
  Neither my earlier amendment to the immigration legislation nor the 
legislation I am introducing today will have any impact whatsoever on 
the prayers of the Dionne family or, for that matter, a dinner table 
chat in Spanish or a family discussion in Navajo.
  Official English laws are not directed at the language people 
themselves choose to speak but, rather, in what language the Government 
speaks to the American people.
  My bill basically recognizes the practical reality of the role of 
English as our national language. It states explicitly that English is 
our national language and provides English a status in law it has not 
before held.
  Making English the official language will clarify that there is no 
entitlement to receive Federal documents and services in languages 
other than English. My legislation declares that any rights of a 
person, as well as services or materials in languages other than 
English, must be authorized or provided by law. It recognizes the 
decades of unbroken court opinions that civil rights laws protecting 
against national origin and discrimination do not create rights to 
Government services and materials in languages other than English.
  If passed, my bill will also repeal all bilingual, or foreign-
language, ballot mandates. There is a reason bilingual ballots make so 
many of my constituents upset. Gathering together at the polling place 
is one of the few remaining civic rituals we perform as Americans.
  I can remember going along with my mother on election day; the 
American flag behind the table where voters signed in and were verified 
as eligible; the sound of the ``thunk'' of the levers on the voting 
machine. I remember thinking even then that voting was a privilege to 
be approached seriously.
  In all too many places these days, the local polling place resembles 
nothing more than a branch of the Mexican consulate or an outpost of 
the United Nations--signs in two, three, or even more languages; people 
yelling at weary poll workers because a Cantonese speaker was summoned 
to translate for a speaker of Mandarin Chinese.
  My constituents ask me all the time how people are supposed to cast 
an informed vote if they cannot follow the debates, which are in 
English, and read the campaign literature, also in English. Bilingual 
ballots strike many of my constituents as an invitation to all kinds of 
voting fraud.
  Of course, when the Government attempts to please everyone by 
translating important documents into multiple languages, mistakes are 
inevitable.
  To mention just one example out of many, in 1993, the Chinese ballot 
in New York City had the Chinese characters for the word ``no'' as a 
translation of the English word ``yes.'' One can only imagine the 
confusion that ensued.
  Official English is popular, even among Hispanics. As I said before 
during the debate on my amendment, if you look at some of the recent 
polling data, such as the Zogby poll in 2006, it found 84 percent of 
Americans, including 77 percent of Hispanics, believed that English 
should be the national language of government operations. A poll of 91 
percent of foreign-born Latino immigrants agreed that learning English 
is essential to succeed in the United States, according to a 2002 
Kaiser Family Foundation survey.
  I wish to conclude by saying that I think it would be a tremendous 
demonstration of good faith by the White House to support my 
legislation. America has plenty of language problems already.
  If the Senate version of the President's immigration proposals should 
become law, every guest worker and ever recipient of amnesty would 
arrive on our shores as a little bundle of linguistic entitlements. 
Local government offices and public schools will be simply overwhelmed 
by the costly language mandates each of these individuals and their 
families will trigger.
  A nation certain of its language and culture can continue to be a 
welcoming nation to legal immigrants. A nation with uncontrolled 
borders and no convictions about what it expects immigrants to do once 
they arrive will soon become a nation in name only.
  Mr. President, my legislation is good for America and good for 
everyone in America. I urge its speedy passage by my colleagues.
                                 ______