pledgin allegiance is not enough...

Tue Mar 1 19:47:50 UTC 2005

I agree with David in principle, I just figured if the
bill IS taken up next year, that would be the time to
address it; in the meantime, we should try to educate
the publicate on lg. issues more generally. Sometimes
I think legislators introduce these bills again and
again just to keep bilingual ed advocates busy, while
the deep-pocketed Unzes of this world are off
advancing on more significant (but less visible)
fronts.
Aurolyn

--- David Johnson <davidcasselsjohnson at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Dr. Luykx, You may be right but as Rep. Livvy
> Floren, "ranking member on the
> Government Administration and Elections Committee"
> said, they will probably
> take up the bill next year and the reason they have
> avoided it is because of
> time, NOT because of "any ideological opposition".
> As long as
> multilingualism is seen as a problem and not a
> resource/right, I doubt
> anti-bilingual legislation will ever really be dead
> in the water in the U.S.
> It seems that once interest is piqued, resources are
> mobilized and the
> anti-bilingual camp can effectively convince enough
> of the politicians and
> the public that bi-ed is hurting kids. I think the
> policy discursive
> environment and linguistic culture affect language
> policy
> creation/implementation and Piscopo is now helping
> to shape the language
> policy discursive context. His comments might not be
> indicative of any
> future action and the bill may never see the light
> of day, but it still
> might not be totally useless? I dunno. It's
> certainly debatable.
>
> >From: Aurolyn Luykx <aurolynluykx at yahoo.com>
> >Reply-To: lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
> >To: lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
> >Subject: Re: pledgin allegiance is not enough...
> >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 09:11:20 -0800 (PST)
> >
> >Personally I wouldn't spend time on it, given that
> the
> >bill seems to be dead in the water, and the article
> >already gave some space to a dissenting argument
> >(Trinidad's), though (admittedly) not a particularl
> >effective one.
> >See the attached for a particularly blood-boiling
> >example of anti-bilingual boneheadedness...
> >Aurolyn
> >
> >--- David Johnson <davidcasselsjohnson at hotmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> > > In a previous email, Dr. Schiffman suggested
> that
> > > responses be developed for
> > > Gregg Easterbrook's article in the New Republic.
> In
> > > a previous lgpolicy
> > > strain, a conversation was generated by another
> list
> > > member, Francis Hult,
> > > about linguistic and educational scholars
> lacking
> > > access to the public
> > > relations and/or political machinery that might
> help
> > > engender more
> > > multilingual language policies in the U.S. and
> stop
> > > initiatives such as
> > > anti-bilingual education laws. (Is that close
> > > Francis? If I'm getting it
> > > wrong let me know...)
> > >
> > > Following Professor Schiffman's example, I would
> > > like to suggest that brief
> > > letters be written in response to Rep. John
> > > Piscopo's comments in the
> > > article below. He makes some clearly erroneous
> > > statements, seemingly based
> > > more on ideological (or perhaps political)
> > > orientations towards language
> > > than on any educational linguistic research.
> > > Interestingly, Piscopo seems to
> > > use bilingual education's failure as support for
> an
> > > English-Only law (even
> > > though other anti-bilingual education advocates
> like
> > > Rosalie Porter are
> > > quick to disassociate with the English-Only
> camp).
> > >
> > > This seems like an opportunity for those who are
> > > interested to engage a
> > > policitician who has burgeoning interests in
> > > spearheading English-Only
> > > legislation and seems to have bilingual
> education on
> > > his radar. So, I am
> > > willing to compile and synthesize any letters
> sent
> > > to me which I will then
> > > send to John Piscopo. I'm imagining a polite and
> > > reasonably brief letter,
> > > quickly outlining the benefits of bilingual
> > > education. Letters from
> > > Connecticut people (Connecticutians?) are
> > > encouraged. Who knows how he'll
> > > respond - my bet is a very vague, meaningless
> form
> > > letter will arrive long
> > > after I forget who John Piscopo is. But, who
> knows?
> > > -David
> > >
> > > >From: "Harold F. Schiffman"
> > > <haroldfs at ccat.sas.upenn.edu>
> > > >Reply-To: lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
> > > >To: Language Policy-List
> > > <lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu>
> > > >Subject: Bill to make English official language
> of
> > > Connecticut Fails
> > > >Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:38:32 -0500 (EST)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >02/18/2005 Thomaston Express
> > > >Piscopo's quest for English language takes hit
> > > >KARSTEN STRAUSS , Special to The Express
> > > >
> > > >THOMASTON - A hearing for Rep. John Piscopo's,
> > > R-76, bill to make English
> > > >the official language of Connecticut has been
> > > denied by the Government
> > > >Administration and Elections Committee.
> Piscopo
> > > said he has introduced
> > > >the bill nine times before and has only
> received
> > > one hearing in the late
> > > >1990s, when the legislation came under fire and
> was
> > > not sent to the House
> > > >for a vote.
> > > >
> > > >"I was hoping for a public hearing this year
> out of
> > > colleague courtesy,"
> > > >Piscopo said. "But it doesn't look like its
> going
> > > to happen." Piscopo said
> > > >that opposition to the bill comes from those
> who
> > > feel it is mean-spirited,
> > > >divisive and even racist - something that he
> > > strongly denies. Piscopo also
> > > >said there are those who wish to bar
> legislation
> > > that has economic
> > > >interests at stake.
> > > >
> > > >"There's an entrenched bureaucracy in the state
> > > that makes a living off of
> > > >printing and education, and other agencies that
> are
> > > entrenched in
> > > >multilingual endeavors," he said. The bill,
> which
> > > according to Piscopo is
> > > >largely symbolic, would declare English as the
> > > state's official language.
> > > >As far as changes to the way the state or
> > > educational curriculum is run in
> > > >Connecticut, Piscopo said that driver's
> licenses,
> > > voting ballots and voter
> > > >registration documents would be printed only in
> > > English.
> > > >
> > > >"We want to state that Connecticut is a state
> with
> > > English as the official
> > > >language so that everybody can assimilate and
> learn
> > > this universal
> > > >language of commerce and to get ahead faster,"
> he
> > > said. Piscopo said that
> > > >bilingual education, once thought to benefit
> > > children raised to speak
> > > >foreign languages, is in fact holding those
> > > children back.
> > > >
> > > >"You do not help a non-English speaking student
> by
> > > keeping them at least
> > > >three years in their native tongue," Piscopo
> said.
> > > "The best way we can
> > > >help someone that does not speak English that
> comes
> > > to this country and
> > > >this state is to teach them English as quickly
> as
> > > possible through English
> > > >immersion, or just English as a second
> language,
> > > not teach them in their
> > > >native tongue." Piscopo says he has backing
> from
> > > Hispanic mothers who
> > > >would like to see their children assimilate
> more
> > > completely into the
> > > >English-speaking curriculum.
> > > >
> > > >"We need these kids to have an equal
> opportunity to
> > > go through the process
> > > >of transition from one culture, one language to
> > > another one," said
> > > >Torrington Board of Education member Edgar
> > > Trinidad, who disagrees
> > > >strongly with Piscopo's views on bilingual
> > > education. "I know many great
> > > >professionals who have been in bilingual
> > > education." "I don't know of what
> > > >world this gentleman is," Trinidad said of
> Piscopo.
> > >  "Maybe he doesn't
> > > >have kids in school. It's proven that bilingual
> > > education is going to help
> > > >the kid enjoy the concept of inclusion."
> > > >
> > > >Trinidad said that some aspects of bilingual
> > > education need to be
> > > >addressed, but not eliminated. Rep. Livvy
> Floren,
> > > R-149, ranking member on
> > > >the Government Administration and Elections
> > > Committee said Piscopo's
> > > >proposed bill was not given a hearing because
> the
> > > commission's calendar
> > > >for this year was too full, not because of the
> > > merits of the bill or any
> > > >ideological opposition.
> > > >
> > > >"It was just a matter of time and priorities,
> and
> > > this just wasn't the
> > > >year," Floren said. "Probably next year, when
> we
> > > have a little bit less on
> > > >our docket, we'll be able to get to it again."
> > > Piscopo said he will be
> > > >looking for an opportunity to submit the bill
> as an
> > > amendment in the House
> > > >of Representatives.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>http://www.zwire.com/site/printerFriendly.cfm?brd=1644&dept_id=10660&newsid=13970250
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >__________________________________
> >Do you Yahoo!?
> >Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
> >http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> ><< PledgingAllegiance.pdf >>
>
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail