U.S. English Extra: Los Angeles Times Letter to the Editor
U.S. English Extra: Los Angeles Times Letter to the Editor
February 14, 2012
To the Editor:
I disagree with the Los Angeles Times’ framing of the debate over English language requirements in the City Council Race in San Luis, Arizona [“English-only for candidates?” 2/11/12].
If nothing else, Alejandrina Cabrera’s situation illustrates how government pandering to non-English speakers only leaves those people at a disadvantage. Living in a predominantly Spanish speaking area, receiving voting ballots in Spanish and remaining linguistically isolated may endear a candidate like Cabrera to the people of San Luis, but it isolates her from being able to communicate with others who do not speak Spanish—not only residents, but also other government officials in neighboring areas. I agree that the residents of a city should be able to choose the person they think will best serve them, but the pool of candidates from which voters choose must all be held to certain legal criteria making them eligible to serve.
The Arizona State Constitution requires elected officials to be able to read, write and speak English without the aid of a translator. Trying to exempt oneself from a law for the sake of making a political statement is absurd. English is the language of more than 90 percent of Americans, and all elected officials, no matter what level of government they seek, should be able to speak it.
Sincerely,
Mauro E. Mujica
Chairman/CEO
U.S. English, Inc.
The original Los Angeles Times Editorial, "English-only for candidates?" [February 11, 2012] can be found here.
U.S. English, Inc. is the nation's oldest and largest non-partisan citizens' action group dedicated to preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States. Founded in 1983 by the late Sen. S.I. Hayakawa of California, U.S. English, Inc. () now has more than 1.8 million members.
