This article first appeared in the St. Louis Beacon: October 10, 2008 - As far as Brian Nieves knows, no governmental body in Missouri has ever conducted an official business session in any language other than English. He wants to keep it that way.
So the Republican state representative from Franklin County sponsored a constitutional Amendment 1 that will be on the ballot statewide on Nov. 4, saying that "English shall be the language of all governmental meetings at which any public business is discussed, decided, or public policy is formulated."
Why does the state constitution need to be changed to address a problem that Nieves himself acknowledges does not really exist?
"The constitution is a document that is readily used as a preventative," he says. "It preserves things about our nation, about our culture, about our state, so we don't go down the wrong path."
But the wrong path is exactly where the amendment would lead Missouri, according to state Rep. Maria Chappelle-Nadal, D-University City, whose district includes many people for whom English is not their first or best language.
"I'm concerned about the new immigrant who just got here and may be a victim of crime," she says. "I'm thinking of the new immigrant who just got here and is trying to establish a new business and has to go through the local bureaucracy, which may not understand him very well.
"We're in a political era where it's not about guns, gays and abortion anymore, it's about scapegoating the immigrant. I think that's very dangerous."
AMENDMENT HISTORY
Missouri already has a law on the books recognizing English as the "common" language in the state, but Nieves says that statute is not enough.
"In my opinion, we have a court system that is completely out of control," he says, "and I didn't want to leave an issue as important as the protection of our language up to the courts."
So, he started the amendment process four years ago -- a length of time he says surprises most of his supporters -- and got the proposal on the ballot, where it requires a simple majority to pass.
"People said, 'Oh, Brian, you're crazy, we'll never have any official proceedings happening in the state of Missouri in a language other than English,'" he recalls.
Then, he says, he heard of a planning and zoning meeting in St. Louis that was partially conducted in a language other than English.
"That's just one instance we have heard of. We're looking for an ounce of prevention instead of a pound of cure."
Nieves says that the amendment will not prevent business at government meetings from being translated into other languages for the benefit of those in attendance. But for official purposes, it must be conducted in English.
"It can be translated into 500 other languages right there on the spot," he says. "In no way, shape or form does this change or alter anything about translation being done. Whatever is allowable for translation today will continue to be allowed."
So, he does not expect the practical effect of the amendment to amount to much.
"Several immigrant type organizations are intentionally misrepresenting this amendment and lying to the people they serve and trying to make it seem that this amendment will affect their lives. It won't affect their lives -- unless their intention is to conduct official government business in a language other than English."
THE NATIONAL PICTURE
Thirty states already have established English as their official language, according to the Washington-based group U.S. English, which is "dedicated to preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States." Seven states have done so by constitutional amendment.
Spokesman Rob Toonkel says Missouri's amendment is typical of what other states have done.
"Obviously we're never going to have a day when everyone is going to speak English," he said. "The state of Missouri is affirmatively saying our meetings are going to be conducted in English.
"If someone comes up and says they want it done in Somali, we don't have to say what we are going to do. The amendment is there. If someone wants to bring his own translator or make special circumstances, fine. But it's not the state's responsibility to translate official meetings for you."
"AN EGREGIOUS BILL"
Because so many propositions will be on next month's ballot, the English amendment has not received much attention, and that situation is a problem for its opponents.
"There will be unexpected things that get out of whack because someone didn't think of what kind of response there might be," says Joan Suarez, chair of the group Missouri Immigrant and Refugee Advocates.
Referring to Nieves, she adds: "When did he become a constitutional lawyer? It's the unintended kinds of things that will have to be tested in court because of the language of the amendment, no matter what the intent."
Chappelle-Nadal, who opposed the amendment when it passed in the Legislature, represents a district that includes many Asian restaurants along Olive Boulevard in University City. She floats this scenario, part real and part hypothetical:
"An Asian-American businessman wanted to get a liquor license. He went to the City Council and the council members couldn't understand what he was saying.
"What happens if there is a councilperson who can speak Mandarin? If that is the case, to help business go along in the meeting, I don't think there's a problem with that councilperson and that gentleman communicating in Mandarin as long as the minutes are put into English."
She also feels that the amendment is the wrong way to proceed in an economy that is increasingly global in scope.
"Instead of pushing English as the official language, what we should be doing is pushing our children and our business community that we should be multilingual.
"We need to be a whole lot savvier about how we approach business in the future. We have to do a better job of communicating, and not every businessperson who comes to Missouri is going to speak English. This really is an egregious bill."
Even so, Chappelle-Nadal recognizes political reality and has few illusions about what the outcome will be on Amendment 1 come Nov. 4.
"It's Missouri," she says with a rueful laugh. "Are you kidding me?"
STORMWATER AMENDMENT
The other constitutional amendment on the ballot, Amendment 4, deals with technicalities surrounding the financing of stormwater control projects.
Missouri voters approved $200 million in state storm water bonds in November 1998. Only $45 million of those bonds have been sold, but since they were approved, the Internal Revenue Service has changed regulations governing the sale of such bonds.
Changes included in Amendment 4 would conform to those changes and make other technical changes. If it gains the simple majority needed for passage, the secretary of state's office says it should have no impact on taxes.