Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


English As Official Language: Democrats Misread America's Preferences in NH Debate

Bookmark and Share

Eight Democratic candidates debated at St. Anselm College in Manchester, New Hampshire on Sunday night. While the headlines from the debate focused on Iraq and health care, by far the most controversial stances carved out by the presidential hopefuls was their unwillingness to have English become the nation's official language.

The stance itself (for Democratic politicians) is not surprising, but it is controversial when viewed through the prism of the policy preferences of not only the America public generally, but also Democrats.

Last year, the United States Senate voted on a purely symbolic bill that made English the "national language" but not the "official language." The American public, however, wants a bill with actual teeth: three surveys conducted since 2005 all found supermajorities of Americans to support making English the official language. An April 2006 FOX News poll found 78 percent favored the passage of such a law. A 2005 Zogby poll showed 79 percent for such a measure. A June 2006 Rasmussen poll found 85 percent of Americans want to make English the national language.

Perhaps out of a fear not to offend the 10 to 15 percent of the country who opposes such legislation, the Democratic presidential candidates are, as a result, running away even from their Democratic base on this issue. Making English the official language is not a partisan issue—at least not within the electorate. More than two-thirds of Democrats in the Zogby poll and 79 percent of Democrats in the Rasmussen poll approved such a measure. Republicans supported the measure in even greater numbers.

To date, 30 states have made English the national language—including Iowa (in 2002) and South Dakota (in 1995) in the Upper Midwest. New Hampshire—host to Sunday's debate and the first primary in the nation in 2008—also passed such a law in 1995.

The introduction of English as a national language is being brought back into public policy debate in light of the new immigration legislation on Capitol Hill. On a national stage Sunday night, Democratic candidates carved out a position at odds with approximately 80 percent of the American public; this will not be a winning issue for whoever emerges as the Democratic nominee in 2008.

Previous post: Clinton Regains Lead in New Iowa Poll
Next post: GOP Presidential Candidates Stand Together For English As Official Language

1 Comment


  • Gosh! What good news (that a majority of the country agrees that English should be the official language of the United States of America). Our founding documents, expressing our deepest beliefs and hopes of what our nation would become, our governing principles, are written in English. If only to honor their extraordinary accomplishment, their language should be recognized as the "official" language of the nation they established.

    Once English is thus recognized and legally established as "official" (as it long has been in practice), we are more than ever free to make arrangements of convenience and appreciation regarding other languages (e.g., translations into their language of origin for newcomers and visitors; preserving Native American culture and language; teaching foreign languages in school, etc.) because there is no question of them having, through exposure, any intent of replacing English as the "official" language of the country. We have much to learn about other people, and about ourselves, through the study of their languages. They have much to learn about us through the study of ours.

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Kevin McCarthy Becomes Least Tenured Floor Leader in US House History

    At less than four terms, McCarthy has served 423 fewer days in the chamber than any floor leader in U.S. House history and almost 10 years less than the average leader.

    Political Crumbs

    The Second Time Around

    Former Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez became the seventh major party or second place gubernatorial candidate in Colorado to get a second chance at the office when he narrowly won his party's nomination last month. Two of the previous six candidates were successful. Democrat Alva Adams lost his first gubernatorial bid to Benjamin Eaton in 1884, but was victorious two years later against William Meyer. Democrat Charles Johnson placed third in 1894 behind Republican Albert McIntyre and Populist incumbent Governor David Waite but returned as the Fusion (Democrat/Populist) nominee in 1898 and defeated GOPer Henry Wolcott. Gubernatorial candidates who received a second chance but lost both general elections include Democrat Thomas Patterson (1888, 1914), Progressive Edward Costigan (1912, 1914), Republican Donald Brotzman (1954, 1956), and Republican David Strickland (1978, 1986).


    How Are the Plurality Winners Doing?

    Nearly 40 percent of plurality winners of U.S. Senate elections lose their seat in the next election cycle. Will that happen to any of the three such incumbents on the ballot in 2014? Recent polling suggests Democrats Al Franken of Minnesota, Mark Begich of Alaska, and Jeff Merkley of Oregon all currently have an advantage over their nominated/frontrunning GOP opponents, but each is flirting with plurality support once again. Franken led endorsed GOPer Mike McFadden 48 to 42 percent in a new SurveyUSA poll while the polling group showed Merkley with a 50 to 32 percent advantage over Monica Wehby. Begich led each of the three major GOP candidates in last month's PPP survey: 42 to 37 percent over Daniel Sullivan, 41 to 33 percent over Mead Treadwell, and 43 to 27 percent over Joe Miller.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting