thedrifter
05-09-06, 08:42 AM
National Anthem And Government Business In English
By Stephen M. Lilienthal
May 9, 2006
Is singing the Star Spangled Banner in Spanish with a salsa beat and a new title, "Nuestro Himno," truly respectful of America?
Expect an even worse version in rap to be unveiled next month which apologizes for illegal immigrants because as the changed lyrics say, "They can't help where they were born." It's no wonder the air waves and websites are buzzing about the desecration of the song that symbolizes our country.
Fortunately, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) has entered the debate, offering common sense reasoning.
Alexander felt so strongly about recognizing the continued importance of our National Anthem he took the floor of the Senate to cite research conducted by WASHINGTON POST reporter David Montgomery, that never has a version of the Star Spangled Banner been produced in the lyrics of another language. Alexander said:
"It may be a first, but it is a big first step in the wrong direction. And it's a mistake precisely because our nation is a nation of immigrants.
"Almost all of us are descended from immigrants from Britain, or Germany, or Italy, or France, or China, or Mexico, or some other country around the world. Our forefathers, who came from those many different countries, spoke many different languages. But, in coming here, they agreed to speak one common language, one language to unify us as a nation, one language so we can all speak with one another. And that language is English."
A common language helps to unite people of different ethnic, racial and religious backgrounds. "English is a part of who we are as Americans -- its part of who unites us as Americans," Alexander emphasizes.
The Star Spangled Banner in Spanish just isn't kosher in Alexander's view. He and many other concerned Americans worry that more than lyrics are changed: the thread that holds America together is fraying. This week Alexander introduced Senate Resolution 458 to affirm the importance of having "statements of national unity" -- the Pledge of Allegiance, the Oath of Allegiance and the Star Spangled Banner -- recited or sung in English -- "the common language of the United States." Alexander reasons that his resolution reiterates what we ought to do as Americans; he hopes its passage would help guide the conduct of federal agencies. Its non-binding nature will not infringe upon First Amendment rights.
Senator Alexander is right to be concerned. The importance of having immigrants learn the language of their new country is reflected in an article "Immigrant Assimilation: Is the U.S. Still a Melting Pot?" (SOUTHWEST ECONOMY, May/June 2004) by Pia M. Orrenius, Senior Economist in the Research Department of the Federal Reserve Bank in Dallas. Orrenius has written favorably toward immigration. She stresses it is even more important now for immigrants and their children living in this country to read and write in English. Increasingly, we are a knowledge economy. Blue-collar jobs, once so plentiful, which enabled immigrants to move up the economic ladder are rapidly disappearing.
Third-generation Hispanic or Latino immigrants should have assimilated into the American culture, possessing the education and skills that enable them to prosper. Yet this is not the case with too many third-generation Hispanics. Orrenius writes:
"The discrepancy in dropout rates in the third generation warrants some concern and possible action by policymakers. By the time the immigrant population reaches the third generation, it should be no different from the native population in educational attainment; yet, the dropout rate among Hispanics is almost twice as high as the non-Hispanic rate."
This does not mean that Hispanics cannot succeed in America. She cites research showing many Mexicans earn less because they have achieved less academically. "Once education is statistically [measured], the wage gap between white natives and third-generation Mexican-Americans narrows [significantly]," she concludes. After initial gains made by grandparent and parents after coming to the United States too many Mexican-Americans "lag behind the national average in education and wage outcomes after several generations because they assimilate not to the national schooling average but to the Hispanic average." That leads Orrenius to conclude education is extremely important to social mobility for immigrants and mediocre English proficiency is one of the negative factors limiting educational attainment among Hispanic-Americans. (Others were lower household income, power parental education, and family size.)
The Urban Institute, in its 2002 study, IMMIGRANT WELL-BEING IN NEW YORK AND LOS ANGELES, identified "the most powerful predictor of poverty" to be poor English skills. It concluded that "more effective English language instruction is an essential anti-poverty tool for working immigrant families."
There is good reason for the public to be concerned over the debased lyrics to the Star Spangled Banner; besides changing lyrics to our National Anthem, it reflects the inability of many immigrants to choose assimilation, preventing them and their children from discovering the full promise of American life.
Senator James M. Inhofe (R-OK) recognizes this. He introduced an amendment last month to the Immigration Bill that for unrelated reasons stalled in the Senate which would recognize English as the official language of this country. All official business would be conducted in English. Senator Inhofe's reasoning is sound, driven as much by concern for immigrants and their children as our national well-being. Immigrants who learn English are more likely to earn more. His amendment incorporates provisions from the National Language Act of 2005 H.R. 4408 sponsored by Rep. Peter King (R-NY). Under Senator Inhofe's amendment the National Anthem would be required to be sung in English at official functions of the Federal Government. Inhofe plans to introduce the amendment as a stand-alone bill. He hopes the amendment will be considered again as the Senate returns to the immigration issue.
Senators Inhofe and Alexander are quite passionate about the importance of the English language because they are fervent about preserving the opportunities fluency in English offers immigrants who play by the rules -- applying to come here, waiting patiently for acceptance, learning English and the history of our country, applying for citizenship. They recognize the value that immigrants can bring to our country; they also know that we are a nation of laws and traditions that must be respected. They know that proficiency in English is essential to enabling immigrants to obtain what they seek from our country -- a better life for themselves and their children.
Each Senator offers a measure that reflects sound, traditional principles which have been ignored as too many policymakers and immigrant "leaders" rushed to embrace multiculturalism.
There will be debates in the Senate later this month over amnesty and border security. Ensuring Americans -- immigrants or natives -- learn what is truly important to our identity as a country devoted to liberty and opportunity is equally pressing. The Senate should devote serious attention to the measures sponsored by Senators Alexander and Inhofe: that English may be recognized as the official language for singing and reciting songs and oaths important to our country, for governmental forms and all other business.
Ellie
By Stephen M. Lilienthal
May 9, 2006
Is singing the Star Spangled Banner in Spanish with a salsa beat and a new title, "Nuestro Himno," truly respectful of America?
Expect an even worse version in rap to be unveiled next month which apologizes for illegal immigrants because as the changed lyrics say, "They can't help where they were born." It's no wonder the air waves and websites are buzzing about the desecration of the song that symbolizes our country.
Fortunately, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) has entered the debate, offering common sense reasoning.
Alexander felt so strongly about recognizing the continued importance of our National Anthem he took the floor of the Senate to cite research conducted by WASHINGTON POST reporter David Montgomery, that never has a version of the Star Spangled Banner been produced in the lyrics of another language. Alexander said:
"It may be a first, but it is a big first step in the wrong direction. And it's a mistake precisely because our nation is a nation of immigrants.
"Almost all of us are descended from immigrants from Britain, or Germany, or Italy, or France, or China, or Mexico, or some other country around the world. Our forefathers, who came from those many different countries, spoke many different languages. But, in coming here, they agreed to speak one common language, one language to unify us as a nation, one language so we can all speak with one another. And that language is English."
A common language helps to unite people of different ethnic, racial and religious backgrounds. "English is a part of who we are as Americans -- its part of who unites us as Americans," Alexander emphasizes.
The Star Spangled Banner in Spanish just isn't kosher in Alexander's view. He and many other concerned Americans worry that more than lyrics are changed: the thread that holds America together is fraying. This week Alexander introduced Senate Resolution 458 to affirm the importance of having "statements of national unity" -- the Pledge of Allegiance, the Oath of Allegiance and the Star Spangled Banner -- recited or sung in English -- "the common language of the United States." Alexander reasons that his resolution reiterates what we ought to do as Americans; he hopes its passage would help guide the conduct of federal agencies. Its non-binding nature will not infringe upon First Amendment rights.
Senator Alexander is right to be concerned. The importance of having immigrants learn the language of their new country is reflected in an article "Immigrant Assimilation: Is the U.S. Still a Melting Pot?" (SOUTHWEST ECONOMY, May/June 2004) by Pia M. Orrenius, Senior Economist in the Research Department of the Federal Reserve Bank in Dallas. Orrenius has written favorably toward immigration. She stresses it is even more important now for immigrants and their children living in this country to read and write in English. Increasingly, we are a knowledge economy. Blue-collar jobs, once so plentiful, which enabled immigrants to move up the economic ladder are rapidly disappearing.
Third-generation Hispanic or Latino immigrants should have assimilated into the American culture, possessing the education and skills that enable them to prosper. Yet this is not the case with too many third-generation Hispanics. Orrenius writes:
"The discrepancy in dropout rates in the third generation warrants some concern and possible action by policymakers. By the time the immigrant population reaches the third generation, it should be no different from the native population in educational attainment; yet, the dropout rate among Hispanics is almost twice as high as the non-Hispanic rate."
This does not mean that Hispanics cannot succeed in America. She cites research showing many Mexicans earn less because they have achieved less academically. "Once education is statistically [measured], the wage gap between white natives and third-generation Mexican-Americans narrows [significantly]," she concludes. After initial gains made by grandparent and parents after coming to the United States too many Mexican-Americans "lag behind the national average in education and wage outcomes after several generations because they assimilate not to the national schooling average but to the Hispanic average." That leads Orrenius to conclude education is extremely important to social mobility for immigrants and mediocre English proficiency is one of the negative factors limiting educational attainment among Hispanic-Americans. (Others were lower household income, power parental education, and family size.)
The Urban Institute, in its 2002 study, IMMIGRANT WELL-BEING IN NEW YORK AND LOS ANGELES, identified "the most powerful predictor of poverty" to be poor English skills. It concluded that "more effective English language instruction is an essential anti-poverty tool for working immigrant families."
There is good reason for the public to be concerned over the debased lyrics to the Star Spangled Banner; besides changing lyrics to our National Anthem, it reflects the inability of many immigrants to choose assimilation, preventing them and their children from discovering the full promise of American life.
Senator James M. Inhofe (R-OK) recognizes this. He introduced an amendment last month to the Immigration Bill that for unrelated reasons stalled in the Senate which would recognize English as the official language of this country. All official business would be conducted in English. Senator Inhofe's reasoning is sound, driven as much by concern for immigrants and their children as our national well-being. Immigrants who learn English are more likely to earn more. His amendment incorporates provisions from the National Language Act of 2005 H.R. 4408 sponsored by Rep. Peter King (R-NY). Under Senator Inhofe's amendment the National Anthem would be required to be sung in English at official functions of the Federal Government. Inhofe plans to introduce the amendment as a stand-alone bill. He hopes the amendment will be considered again as the Senate returns to the immigration issue.
Senators Inhofe and Alexander are quite passionate about the importance of the English language because they are fervent about preserving the opportunities fluency in English offers immigrants who play by the rules -- applying to come here, waiting patiently for acceptance, learning English and the history of our country, applying for citizenship. They recognize the value that immigrants can bring to our country; they also know that we are a nation of laws and traditions that must be respected. They know that proficiency in English is essential to enabling immigrants to obtain what they seek from our country -- a better life for themselves and their children.
Each Senator offers a measure that reflects sound, traditional principles which have been ignored as too many policymakers and immigrant "leaders" rushed to embrace multiculturalism.
There will be debates in the Senate later this month over amnesty and border security. Ensuring Americans -- immigrants or natives -- learn what is truly important to our identity as a country devoted to liberty and opportunity is equally pressing. The Senate should devote serious attention to the measures sponsored by Senators Alexander and Inhofe: that English may be recognized as the official language for singing and reciting songs and oaths important to our country, for governmental forms and all other business.
Ellie