Nathan Moore's Thoughts
A Republican Debate on English Only – Brought to You Entirely in English
Jon Crisp, President of Nashville English First and former chairman of the Davidson County Republican Party, responded to my last post on the English Only referendum. His response and my reply have been copied below as a new post.
Nathan, You are too clever by half. You of all people should understand the value of assimilation over accomodation. If we were proposing this effort as a ploy to grandstand, I for one would have made a different choice of issues…however, this is the a case of putting our city, state, country, and conscience first. Our Government ought to encourage assimilation not enable the accomdation of the further fragmentation of our culture. Opposing this issue simply furthers the liberal vision for America. It saddens me to see you siding with the liberal apologists of our city who would eventually make Nashville a defacto sanctuary city… one policy at a time . This is not a Party issue but it is a conservative issue, which outlines the reason our party is starting to lose elections. I respectfully hope that you will reconsider your position… this is a simple issue that a vast majority of our citizenry seems to understand clearly. If it is a matter of conscience for you, I understand…but we’ll have to agree to disagree. I will respect that decision if it is the one you make…however, you should also respect our position too. Remember that the only thing that you will ever find in the middle of the road is usually roadkill. Your position on this will define your political future to a degree in the future if you remain a Republican. This effort is just the initial statement in our effort to de-magnetize Nashville. See you at the ballot box.
Always your friend,
Jon Crisp
President
Nashville English First
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Thank you for your response, Jon. This is not a personal issue for me in the least, either.
My substantive problem is that this referendum is duplicative. State law already governs the operations of Nashville’s government in this respect. Tenn. Code. Ann. Sec. 4-1-404 says
“English is hereby established as the official and legal language of Tennessee. All communications and publications, including ballots, produced by governmental entities in Tennessee shall be in English, and instruction in the public schools and colleges of Tennessee shall be conducted in English unless the nature of the course would require otherwise.”
The term “governmental entities” means all local governments are subject to this law, including Metro.
My alternative – to actually teach English, because no one immigrates here intending not to learn the language – is operationally assimilative. Every successful society and economy needs a common form of communication. We already have that language. We already have that state law. This referendum is an unneeded waste of resources. Being for English in the United States is like being for children and against kicking puppies. Of course we want everyone to have the ability to basically function in English. That is precisely what I have advocated in practice, not promoted by redundant fiat.
If known Republicans head down this road in the more moderate political landscape of Davidson County, we will be sealing our own fate in the wilderness for another generation. As a defender of efficient and necessary government, I cannot support a legally unnecessary local referendum, the hours wasted its activists could have been spent advancing other, real issue items that truly position our party to win elections, and most importantly, govern well.
I must take some offense to the suggestion that “Your position on this will define your political future to a degree in the future if you remain a Republican.”
If this is the case, be certain I will then focus my efforts on remaking the Republican Party. It has been done before.
All I have done publicly, on this site for almost five years, is advocate limited government, lower taxes, strict constructionism, a strong national defense, and a non-Obama presidency. Surely my Republican credentials are safe.
Now we add to that my opposition to this referendum, which anyone can see is duplicative government.
If anyone, without the use of meaningless generalities, can specifically tell me how the English-only referendum will accomplish anything not already covered by state law, I will be happy to consider a change in my position.
And of course, I’ll always be your friend. More unites us than divides us.
Nathan Moore
October 13th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Nathan wrote: My alternative – to actually teach English, because no one immigrates here intending not to learn the language – is operationally assimilative.”
Not always true. I’ve witnessed it first hand with legal immigrants. There are some cultural differences that stand in the way of wives learning English.
Nathan wrote: “The term “governmental entities” means all local governments are subject to this law, including Metro.”
Until this is actually tested in court…doesn’t this remain one lawyer’s opinion? Even if he is very a respected lawyer.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:17 am
If there are cultural differences that severe, then there is nothing the government can do – certainly government mandate will not do any good in those circumstances. The laws are already in place.
I thought about your second point for a moment when I wrote the response; however, state departments are not entities, and the statute itself points to distinctly local government functions, such as education and ballot printing. The state law is rather clear, which is why we do not see the proponents of the Metro English Only measure bringing it up.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:24 am
You’re right…if the pleading of a dozen folks who had their best interests at heart didn’t sway them…law won’t either. HOWEVER, I only bring that up to point out that some people do immigrant with no intention of learning English. Anecdotal evidence seems to indicate that it’s many more than the professional immigrant advocates want to admit.
October 14th, 2008 at 8:58 am
Nathan,
Well said. Thanks for your response. I also value our friendship, and will do my part to insure that the party listens to its constituents. I value the “symbolic” nature of the referendum as well as its actual effect. The exercise in promotion of this bill has exposed Mayor Dean as more liberal by and large than almost anyone suspected. Mayor Dean has been inept in his political handling of this. Many apologists for the immigrant community fear how “this will make Nashville look” to the rest of the country…but this is exactly the message many want to send the nation. Phil Valentines “Phil”-osophy of de-magnetizing Nashville as a “Welcoming” place or enabler that would support activities designed to support the use of illegal labor and the loss of jobs for legal Nashvillian’s is one I happen to agree with. If there is no economic incentive for people to illegally come here, by and large they won’t. English First is only the first step toward de-magnetizing our government and local culture. Mayor Karl Dean has told several groups that he will “refuse” to enforce this law if it is passed which should be very troubling to you as a legal scholar and conservative…it certainly troubles me. Thanks again.
Jon Crisp
October 15th, 2008 at 8:55 am
If it only had some practical application. The Metropolitan government is already operating in English, and immigrants of both legal varieties come anyway. It is already the law. We are in no way a “magnet” – Daron Hall has made it plain that illegal immigrants doing illegal things are gone – it takes about 5 minutes and a run to the snack machine for the Sheriff’s Office to place an ICE hold on an illegal immigrant.
In short, half a million dollars on the front end, and more than that likely on the back end, is a ton of of coin for a wholly symbolic measure.
This is not a liberal / conservative argument. I support the state statute and its application. I do not, and cannot, get behind a superfluous measure. The amendment does indeed make our city look bad. It is overkill. For example, you have a (legal) immigrant family, where the older generation stays and works the home, knowing no English (not uncommon in the least), and the younger generations go out and work, who do know English – are you really saying we do not want that kind of immigrant family in our city? Because with this charter amendment blasted across the land, they certainly will not feel welcome.
The eventual storyline is this: Conservatives Spend $500,000 Passing Law That is Already Law.