U.S. English

ESTABLISHED: 1983
EMPLOYEES: 15
MEMBERS: over 1.1 million
PAC: None

Contact Information:
ADDRESS: 1747 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Ste. 1100 Washington, DC 20006
PHONE: (202) 833-0100
TOLL FREE: (800) 873-4547
FAX: (202) 833-0108
E-MAIL: info@us-english.org
URL: http://www.us-english.org
CHAIRMAN; CEO: Mauro E. Mujica

WHAT IS ITS MISSION?

U.S. English aims to promote the use of English as the official language of the United States, either through a constitutional amendment, or through other legislative means. The organization insists that the best way to serve the varied immigrant populations in the United States is to encourage and assist them in learning English and that money spent on bilingual education should emphasize teaching students English above all else. U.S. English is perhaps most actively involved in opposing the increasing trend that not only enables, but requires non-native speakers to be able to vote, apply for driver's licenses, and perform other governmental functions in their native languages.

HOW IS IT STRUCTURED?

The organization is divided into two entities. U.S. English, Inc., concentrates on lobbying for reform on behalf of official English, with a governmental (lobbying) department, a communications department, a research department, and a development department. The 501(c)3 (tax exempt) U.S. English Foundation carries out the other functions of the organization, such as administering grants to special programs, and distributing scholarships. Both branches have three-member boards of directors chaired by the president. There are 15 employees between the two branches.

While U.S. English, Inc., may fund and participate in state and local official English campaigns and retain state council lobbyists, all efforts of both branches of the organization are centralized in its Washington, D.C., offices, which cultivate and maintain the membership of 1.3 million, whose dues augment funds solicited from other foundations.

PRIMARY FUNCTIONS

U.S. English Foundation and U.S. English, Inc., are concerned exclusively with the issue of making English the official language of the United States. Their efforts to achieve this goal, however, are diverse. The U.S. English Foundation functions primarily through grant solicitation and disbursement. The group is dedicated to funding efforts that help immigrants learn the English language, so that they can take advantage of the economic and social benefits available in the United States to the fullest extent. The foundation awards scholarships and grants designed to advance the teaching of English to immigrant groups and provides resources that explain how and where immigrants can participate in community education programs. In addition, the organization researches language policy in countries where more than one official language is present, and uses advertising and other media projects to increase public awareness of their cause.

U.S. English, Inc., the foundation's sister organization, concentrates on lobbying legislators to support federal and state legislation devised to stop the multilingual duplication of government transactions and to reallocate these funds to programs that teach English to immigrants. At times the organization is required to defend their legislative victories in court: challenges to English-only legislation in Arizona ultimately forced U.S. English to defend the law in front of the Supreme Court. They also conduct and sponsor surveys that indicate the extent of support on behalf of the American people for their cause.

PROGRAMS

The U.S. English Foundation is primarily involved in funding efforts to teach English to foreign-language speakers. For example, their funding maintains the Villa Maria Center, a school that provides free English-language training to immigrant communities in Erie, Pennsylvania. The organization also sometimes becomes directly involved in efforts to teach English. In Washington, D.C., it has adapted a literacy program to work in conjunction with tennis lessons for disadvantaged Spanish-speaking youth, modifying the program to focus on verbal skills rather than literacy. In addition the foundation sponsors two graduate scholarships through the U.S.–U.K. Fluorite Commission; recipients study methods of teaching English as a Second Language (ESL) at prestigious universities in the United Kingdom.

BUDGET INFORMATION

In 1996 the organization took in $7,438,000 in contributions, the vast majority of this sum coming from individual members. Management costs absorbed $803,000 of the total income, fund-raising $2,598,000, and programs $4,825,000. U.S. English disburses a significant amount of their revenue through grants.

HISTORY

U.S. English was founded by S. I. Hayakawa, an immigrant to the United States who received his Ph.D. in English and became a well-known semanticist and professor at San Francisco State University. In 1976 Dr. Hayakawa was elected to represent California as a Republican in the U.S. Senate. He was the first U.S. senator to introduce the English Language Amendment, a failed attempt to make sweeping official English reform through constitutional tactics. Upon leaving the Senate in 1983, he helped found U.S. English to promote an official language and presided as honorary chairman of the organization until the time of his death in 1992.

In 1986 U.S. English was active in convincing more than a million Californians to sign petitions to put Proposition 63 on the state ballot, an initiative that was to make English the official language of the state. The measure, which passed by 73 percent, has led to numerous legal disputes regarding the rights of employees to use languages other than English in the workplace. Twenty-two other states have enacted legislation that makes English their official language, although this does not always mean that government activities are limited to using English.

U.S. English has endured its share of public controversy: in 1989 former Reagan aide and senatorial candidate Linda Chavez and retired television anchorman Walter Cronkite disassociated themselves from the organization, having been president and advisory board member, respectively. Chavez and Cronkite were disturbed by the disclosure of a memo authored by the chairman of U.S. English, John Tanton. They felt the memo contained elements that were biased against immigrants. Three years later the acting director and chairman of U.S. English, Stanley Diamond, resigned after being accused of misusing the organization's funds to support political candidates in California.

Congressman Norman Shumway subsequently acted as chair for approximately six months, until the board selected Mauro E. Mujica, an architect and international businessman as well as an immigrant from Chile, to become the Chairman/CEO of U.S. English.

Since it inception, U.S. English has been active in lobbying for official English legislation, which would amend federal law to declare English the official language of the U.S. government. These efforts began to see some success in the 1990s. In 1996 House Resolution 123 was introduced by California Representative Duke Cunningham. This bill would have established English as the official language of the federal government and required, with some exceptions, that English be used in all official government communication. The bill was passed by the House, with a vote of 259 to 169, but no action was taken by the Senate that year. The bill was subsequently reintroduced in 1997, and again in 1999. All of these bills called for the establishment of English as the official language of the federal government, one in which most (although not all) government business and communications would have to be conducted.

In 1998 U.S. English, Inc., contributed heavily to advocating and lobbying on behalf of successful legislation in California that radically reduced bilingual education in California public schools. Since this victory, the organization has been monitoring the outcome with concern, claiming that many educators have responded by defying and circumventing the law and that others were simply unprepared to accommodate the change. U.S. English, Inc., has subsequently been observing the outcomes of the lawsuits brought by parents against school districts who have allegedly not complied with the legislation.

CURRENT POLITICAL ISSUES

According to a U.S. English-sponsored poll, roughly 86 percent of Americans favor adopting English as the official national language. With such statistics as justification, the primary focus of the U.S. English Foundation has been to amend federal law to declare English the official language of the U.S. government. While Rep. Bill Emerson, who sponsored H.R. 123 for nearly a decade, was unable to push the legislation through in his lifetime, the prospects for passing official English legislation improved during the late 1990s.

The issue of official English obviously has more resonance in areas of the United States where there are large numbers of foreign speakers. Events in Arizona have illustrated the kinds of complications that have confronted U.S. English while working on behalf of state legislation. In 1988 voters in Arizona passed a referendum making English the state's official language of government, partly in response to the efforts of U.S. English. However various individuals and groups challenged the law's constitutionality and delayed its implementation. U.S. English was forced to defend the law in the Supreme Court, which upheld Arizona's official English law on March 3, 1997.

One of the most pressing issues on the organization's agenda is the possibility of statehood for the commonwealth of Puerto Rico. The possibility of a fifty-first state where less than 25 percent of the citizens speak English presents a potential conflict in implementing official English policies nationally, and is consequently a concern for U.S. English.

Case Study: Statehood for Puerto Rico

Debate over statehood has been ongoing since Puerto Rico came under U.S. authority in the nineteenth century. The succession of local governments have been granted more and more autonomy as a result of Puerto Rican nationalist movements challenging—sometimes violently—U.S. control. Today Puerto Rico is largely self-governed, while remaining under the direct authority of Congress. This is due to the fact that in 1967 a majority of its citizens voted to maintain commonwealth status rather than become a state or seek independence. However, many Puerto Ricans have become dissatisfied with the commonwealth status; many prefer statehood and some hope for complete independence.

In 1993 citizens of the island voted on whether the future of Puerto Rico's status should be commonwealth, statehood, or independence. Unlike the 1967 election, commonwealth status did not receive a majority vote, despite earning a close 48.6 percent, while the statehood option came in an extremely close second, accumulating 46.3 percent of the vote. Independence lagged behind at 4.4 percent. Because the vote was so close, and because commonwealth status did not receive a majority, there still remains much confusion over what the future status of Puerto Rico should be.

On May 21, 1997, the Resources Committee of the House of Representatives passed H.R. 856, a bill introduced by Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), sending it to the full House for consideration. The bill would establish a referendum, to be carried out every 10 years, allowing voters in Puerto Rico to decide if the island should become a state, gain independence, or retain its commonwealth status. U.S. English has been active in the debate on whether to offer Puerto Rico statehood. Concerned with the idea of a state where (according to the 1990 U.S. Census) over 75 percent of the citizens speak only Spanish, the organization mounted a vigorous campaign to modify H.R. 856 to mandate official English regulations in the new state, should statehood become a reality.

U.S. English contracted surveys of American and Puerto Rican citizens that indicated that Puerto Ricans are too heavily invested in their own Spanish-speaking culture and identity to assimilate into an English-speaking country, and that Americans are hesitant to incorporate a state in which the vast majority of citizens don't speak English. The organization publicized this information, and emphasized the case of Quebec, a French-speaking province that has repeatedly threatened and attempted to secede from Canada, to illustrate the difficulty in incorporating a state that doesn't share a common language with the rest of the nation. Chairman Mujica's testimony before the House Committee on Resources on March 19, 1997, encouraged imposing the following conditions should Puerto Rican statehood become a reality: legislative and judicial proceedings and records must be kept in English; English fluency must be required for holding public office; public schools must teach in English; a majority of the population must speak English fluently; and a supermajority vote of 75 percent or more is needed to approve statehood.

Debate over the Puerto Rican statehood initiative continued into the late 1990s. Few legislators believed that Puerto Rico could meet the proposed requirements in the near future, particularly the requirement of an English-speaking majority in the population. When it became known that President Clinton would veto a bill which included the proposed requirements, U.S. English's proposals were abandoned by lawmakers. Nevertheless, U.S. English's arguments had an effect on lawmakers. On March 14, 1998, the House passed the bill, but by only one vote, 209 to 208. With such small support in the House, leaders in the Senate decided against considering the issue and the House bill failed to be enacted into law.

Public Impact

U.S. English believes that a non-English speaking fifty-first state would undermine their vision of official English status for the entire nation, and unravel their efforts to implement their vision at both the state and national level. Incorporating Puerto Rico into the United States without official English stipulations would create an exception that could lend support to efforts for multilingual governmental and educational structures in other parts of the country. The organization fears that this situation could create a country divided by language barriers.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

U.S. English chairman Mauro E. Mujica has made the passage of H.R. 123 and S. 323 his top priority. "We are beginning the next and perhaps most crucial phase of this movement," said Mujica on the foundation Web page. "For the first time, we now have a legitimate opportunity for these companion bills to be passed by the full Congress. The American people want a common-sense law recognizing English as our official language." At the same time, the organization will concentrate on continuing their successful efforts to encourage and implement state legislation.

GROUP RESOURCES

U.S. English has a Web site at http://www.us-english.org that offers extensive information on the organization and the issues that it supports, as well as how to become a member. Dues are not set at a specific amount; members contribute $10 or more. The organization maintains a database that catalogues regional resources for English classes for non-English speakers, which is also helpful for English language teachers looking for volunteer or work opportunities. Information on the database is available by calling 1-800-787-8216. Individuals can E-mail U.S. English at info@us-english.org or write to 1747 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Ste. 1100, Washington, DC 20006. To telephone the organization, dial (202) 833-0100 or 1-800-USE-NGLI (1-800-873-6454). To fax, dial (202) 833-0108.

GROUP PUBLICATIONS

U.S. English mails a quarterly newsletter to its members, as well as monthly mailings encouraging donations, but does not publish materials for the general public. The organization's Web site (http://www.us-english.org/foundation/reading.htm) gives a list of recommended reading, including Sen. S. I. Hayakawa's book Language in Thought and Action.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Branigan, William. "Puerto Rico Winner: 'None of the Above.'" Washington Post, 14 December 1998.

Buckley, William F. "What is Wrong with Requiring English?" Houston Chronicle, 7 September 1995.

Fried, David J. "Say No to the 'English-Only' Movement." Christian Science Monitor, 10 May 1989.

Henry, Sarah. "Fighting Words; California's Official-Language Law Promises to Preserve and Protect English. The Question Is, Can the State Preserve and Protect its Citizens' Civil Rights at the Same Time?" Los Angeles Times, 10 June 1990.

Levy, Dan. "U.S. English Goes National with Campaign." San Francisco Chronicle, 9 July 1992.

Mujica, Mauro E. "English Unites the Nation." USA Today, 6 April 1995.

——. "Official Language Movement Not Same as 'English Only.' " The Phoenix Gazette, 29 May 1993.

Puente, Maria. "'English Only' Movement Picks Up Steam." USA Today, 14 March 1995.

Savage, David G. "High Courts 'English Only' Case Boils Down to Legalese." Los Angeles Times, 5 December 1996.

"Say, Can You See?" Economist, 14 March 1998.