Philosophical debate aside, the proposed law is superfluous. English already is the most common language in Michigan; everything from street signs to voting ballots are written in English. While supporters of the bill believe that an "English-only" law will "legalize" the state's majority of English speakers, neither lawmakers nor residents stand to gain from a law that can only hurt a portion of the population. Voorhees seeks to officiate a practice that is already commonplace and, in doing so, effectively exclude members of the community for speaking in another tongue.
The bill blatantly contradicts the spirit in which the first Americans founded the country - which serves as an immigrants escape from oppression. To make Michigan - or any other state - "English-only" would create a similar environment, one from which immigrants flee. The fact that Michigan has fewer non-English speakers than states like California or New York is irrelevant; solidarity does not come out of exclusion, whether it be of a few citizens or of thousands.
The bill would not "create unity," as its supporters suggest; it will divide the state. It goes against the spirit of diversity that has made the United States strong in the past. Instead of celebrating differences, the law encourages homogeneity - the law would force non-English speakers to change. Voorhees claims that to make English the state's official language would be "good for society."
However, he also maintains that the law would be "symbolic" and have "no impact." The latter is far from true - by requiring all residents to speak English, non-speakers would lose opportunities to the more privileged speakers. Until they learn English, non-speakers may find it practically impossible to get a job, even in communities where most residents speak the same - non-English - native tongue.
Moreover, the proposed bill translates into bad news for the rest of the country. English-only proposals have made it to the Supreme Court on more than one occasion - any fuel for the fire could lead to renewed efforts from other states to shred the patchwork of languages spoken there. The population the proposals aim to cut is substantial. The 1990 census found that 32 million people over the age of 5 - 14 percent of U.S. residents - speak a foreign language in their home, an 11-percent jump since 1980.
Ultimately, the proposal violates First Amendment rights, which protect all Americans - even those who will never speak a word of English. Limiting free expression is unconstitutional. For more than 100 years, the United States has flourished in the diversity allowed by not having an official language.
Language must not be an elitist tool to alienate a substantial portion of the populations. An English-only law would be an injustice. The state House must not pass Voorhees' proposed bill.