Torres Blasts English-Only Initiative, Veto of Bilingual Education

In a fiery address to a Latino teachers’ organization in Anaheim, state Sen. Art Torres (D-Los Angeles) on Thursday denounced passage this week of the English-language initiative and Gov. George Deukmejian’s veto in September of the bilingual education bill.

The legislator called for massive lobbying in Sacramento by Latinos to press for bilingual education and other bills that are important to Spanish-speaking Americans.

Torres was the opening speaker at the 21st annual conference of the state Assn. of Mexican American Educators, which continues through Saturday at the Emerald Hotel in Anaheim. About 400 educators are attending.

Discouraging to Latinos

Torres, a member of the Senate Education Committee, told the conference that several recent political events, including statewide passage Tuesday of Proposition 63, making English the state’s official language, are discouraging to the Latino community. He criticized former Sen. S.I. Hayakawa, one of the sponsors of the official-language initiative.

“To Sam Hayakawa, I say to you . . . ‘I speak English, but you will never take away who and what I am in this country,’ ” Torres said.

“To Gov. Deukmejian, congratulations on your election, but do not use it as a mandate to continue to discriminate against Hispanic-Americans,” he added.

Referring to demographic studies that show that Latinos are destined to become the majority ethnic group in California, Torres said, ” . . . When we do take power, we will not commit the same injustices against the minority community as we continue to withstand from those who are in power today.”

Bilingual education, Torres said, “isn’t here to create a Quebec. Bilingual education is here to create educated, participating young people who can serve as leaders for the future of California.”

Deukmejian Veto

On Sept. 30, Deukmejian vetoed a bill that would have extended the life of California’s controversial bilingual-education law. That law, which requires two-language teaching in any class that has 10 or more non-native-English speakers, will expire in June. In his veto, the governor said the state is nearing a spending limit and that some programs, including bilingual education, should be reviewed for cost-effectiveness. He directed the state Department of Finance to study the worth of bilingual education.

Torres assailed that decision, saying that a finance agency is an inappropriate department to study the merits of an education program.

But he also acknowledged that it will be difficult to win passage of another bilingual-education law. Before his speech, Torres said that it is possible that state-mandated bilingual education may die altogether. “The governor may feel he got a mandate from the people,” Torres said, referring to Proposition 63.

State education officials, however, have noted that some type of two-language teaching is required in California, even without a state law. The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 1974 decision involving a San Francisco school controversy, ordered that California provide some form of teaching in a language understandable to non-English speakers. That decision did not mandate how the teaching was to be done.

Critics of California’s bilingual-education law have said that Deukmejian was correct in vetoing its continuance because the state law is much more rigid than the U.S. Supreme Court order.



Comments are closed.