Date: Fri, 15 Sep 1995 08:17:52 -0600


Subject: EOL legislation

I apologize for not letting this thread die (quite yet).

On Thu, 14 Sep 1995, Donald Larmouth wrote:

I thought it might be useful to review exactly what is involved in the proposed

"English only" legislation--especially since the author of H.R. 739 is Toby

Roth, the congressman from my district here in Wisconsin.

Actually, there are at least six bills before the House right now having

to do directly with such legislation (including H.J. Res. 87, a

constitutional amendment sponsored by Steve Stockman of Texas that requires

everyone over the age of five to be able to communicate in English in order

to obtain citizenship). One of the six bills (H. Con. Res. 83) opposes the

establishment of an official language (while at the same time recognizing

that English is the dominant language); the other five favor it.

There are also bills dealing indirectly with the concept, including (for

example) one that provides tax deductions to employers who pay to have

English taught to their employees.

The four remaining bills attempting to establish English as the official

language (H.R. 123, H.R. 345, H.R. 739, and H.R. 1005) all state that they

are amending title 4 of the U.S. Code (I don't know what title 4 says), and

they also all state that English is to be considered the official language

of government. H.R 739, the one sponsored by Congressman Roth, is typical

of them; I'm including the complete text below for anyone who's interested.

I'm also including the texts of the bill opposing EOL and of the proposed

constitutional amendment.