RSS
Home
Is Nashville's proposed 'English First' amendment necessary?
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
January 22nd is the official day for voting on the "English First” Charter Amendment proposed for Nashville Government by Metro Councilman (CM) Eric Crafton. Early voting began last week and runs through the 17th.
But controversy over the legislation has been running through the community for years. Supporters claim it only insists official Nashville government business be conducted in English. Detractors argue “It's racist!”, “It's unsafe!”, “It's bad for business!” and everything in between.
A recent luncheon featured CM Crafton and Nathan Moore, a local attorney, political blogger and activist, presenting quick summaries of their support for and opposition to the legislation with a later Q&A.
The event's promo promised to strip emotion from the discussion and expose the bill's real consequences for Nashvillians. Yet it was clear from the presentations, questions and answers that people are passionate about the matter.
Consider each side's choice of name for the bill; “English First” v. “English Only”. While the bill's language requires government affairs to be “taken only in the English language”, it allows for “exceptions to protect public health and safety.” Supporters say this makes it “English First” while foes say “English Only”.
This is a special election requiring thousands in taxpayer dollars to undertake. Detractors call it a waste while proponents argue the measure was on November's “free” ballot until political and judicial machinations by their foes forced it off, necessitating a costly special election.
Far from costing taxpayers, supporters argue it will save Nashvillians over $100,000 annually by eliminating the need to provide free licensed translators. Foes point out 95% of that translating is mandated by Federal law and the Amendment could result in Nashville losing millions in Federal funding.
While not devoid of emotion, only Moore's comments offered what seemed a non-emotional reason to support his view. He didn't claim “It's racist”, “It's unsafe!”or “It's bad for business!”. He made the case, “It's unnecessary!” Tennessee State Law, in 1984, (TCA 4-1-404) established English as Tennessee's official language and requires “All communications and publications … produced by governmental entities in Tennessee shall be in English...” Given that, why does a Tennessee city's government need a law seeming to do little more than indicate they will abide by state law?
In CM Crafton's original 2006 request that Metro adopt English First, he stated it should do so based on TCA 4-1-404. English First supporters rightly recognize someone may attempt, in the future, to have Nashville government violate Tennessee's requirement for government business to be conducted in English. I agree with CM Crafton that we need protection from such an attempt. But to make English First a necessary addition to Metro legal code, Crafton must demonstrate how Tennessee state law fails to protect his constituents and how English First will.
Nashville's NewsChannel 5 was present and has posted raw video of the debate here.
Related Articles:
Comments
