Editorial: PA’s language proposal will unfairly limit minority residents

Pennsylvania is facing a budget crisis, and Rep. Ryan Warner (R-Fayette) thinks he has found the solution — make English the official language of the state.

On Monday, the House Committee held a hearing to discuss a bill, proposed by Warner, that would make English the official state language in Pennsylvania. The bill would also require all state government documents to be written in English. According to Warner, in an interview with WESA, Pittsburgh’s NPR station, the bill would save money typically spent on hiring interpreters and translators to rewrite legislation and other government documents in other languages.

“We cannot go to the citizens of Pennsylvania and ask them for more money without turning over every stone and without looking at every option for reducing the cost of state government,” Warner said.

Just how much money the bill would save Pennsylvania is unclear — Warner was unavailable for comment — but its human rights costs are astronomically high.

The bill itself says little about money, simply determining that the money saved in translation costs is in the best interest of Pennsylvania’s budget.

“Government has a fiduciary responsibility to the citizenry to ensure that it operates as efficiently as possible, and the growth of multiple language bureaucracies and printing represents an abrogation of this fiduciary responsibility,” is written in Section 2: Legislative Findings.

This may be true, but the government also has a responsibility to adequately equip and inform its residents.

Pennsylvania has a minority population that relies on these translation services. In 2013, the U.S. Census Bureau determined that 6 percent of Pennsylvania’s population was foreign born. At the time, 10.3 percent of Pennsylvania’s population spoke a language other than English at home.

These residents have the right to access — and comprehend —  legal resources. Without state-provided translation resources, residents with limited English proficiency will be at a disadvantage.

If Pennsylvania requires these residents to self-translate legal documentation, Pennsylvania is equally at a disadvantage, as self-translation could result in misinterpretation.

The only exceptions to this proposal are when it comes to documents related to matters of public safety, the judicial system, or tourism efforts. While these exceptions prevent misinterpretation in necessary circumstances, the proposal still limits minority residents from full participation in Pennsylvania’s society.

Robert Vandervoort, executive director of ProEnglish, a lobbying group that supports making English the country’s official language, said in an interview with WESA that this legislation will encourage assimilation.

“It tells people that when you come here, you learn English [and] you become part of our society,” Vandervoort said.

Pennsylvania shouldn’t require its residents to learn English to become a part of society. Their status as residents of the state and the taxes they pay make them just as integral a member of society as English-speaking residents.

If the bill becomes law, it will do the opposite of encouraging assimilation. The bill sends immigrants a strong message — that they are not welcome and Pennsylvania will not accommodate them.

Rep. Pamela DeLissio (D-Montgomery) said the bill’s purpose goes too far considering its unforeseeable benefits.

“We’ve already established that we don’t know that this is saving any material money,” DeLissio said in an interview with WESA.

If Pennsylvania wants to address its budget crisis, cutting corners on minority provisions is not the solution.

Pinching pennies is one thing — cinching liberties is another.