KING APPLAUDS DECISION TO GIVE AMERICANS ANOTHER
CHANCE TO END BILINGUAL VOTING
WASHINGTON -
Following outrage from Members of Congress,
citizen groups and constituents, the bill to
renew certain controversial provisions of the
1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA) was pulled from the
U.S. House voting calendar today, giving Members
more time to respond to concerns before a vote
by the full House.
The bill to renew
the VRA, H.R. 9, was expected to go to the full
House today; however, a debate over
institutionalizing bilingual voting loomed over
House leadership.
U.S. Congressman
Steve King (IA-05) offered an amendment to the
bill, which was denied by the House Rules
Committee, the body that decides which
amendments are to be made in order on the House
floor. King's amendment would prevent renewal of
a provision of the bill which requires
localities to produce multilingual voting
ballots for twenty-five additional years.
"The Voting Rights
Act is an important law, once meant to ensure
minorities were not denied their right to vote
in the 1960s," said King. "The move to allow
Members more time to respond is a setback only
for those who want to institutionalize
multilingual voting for the next twenty-five
years. It is irresponsible to renew these
provisions for another generation. A Member of
Congress could serve Congress for an entire
lifetime without getting the opportunity to
object to these federal mandates on behalf of
their tax-paying constituents."
"If we want to
demolish modern-day obstacles and bring all
backgrounds into our voting process to
communicate with each other, we must unify the
country instead of driving a wedge between
cultures," added King.
King recently
authored a letter to Leadership signed by 79
Members outlining concerns over the renewal of
multilingual ballot provisions in Sections 203
and 4(f)(4) of the VRA. The provisions were not
part of the original VRA, but were added ten
years later.
Following is an
excerpt of the letter:
"Multilingual ballots divide our country,
increase the risk of voter error and fraud, and
burden local taxpayers. The multilingual ballot
mandate encourages the linguistic division of
our nation and contradicts the "Melting Pot"
ideal that has made us the most successful
multi-ethnic nation on earth. This increasingly
burdensome mandate on state and local
governments to provide multilingual voting
materials also serves to undermine the election
process. It contradicts the requirement that
immigrants need to demonstrate the ability to
read and understand English in order to become
naturalized citizens. The existence of
multilingual ballots increases the risk of
election errors and fraud. Furthermore, not only
are multilingual ballots an unfunded mandate,
but they are a waste of taxpayer funds because
they are mandated by the VRA without regard to
whether they are actually used."
If provisions
expire, people with limited-English proficiency
would still have help inside the voting booth.
Voters who need language assistance are already
permitted, under current law, to bring an
interpreter of their choice into the voting
booth.
"Every citizen
deserves to cast an informed ballot, and this is
the right approach for voters who have
difficulty understanding voting materials in
English," added King.
