Next week, Congress will complete its review of the 1965 Voting Rights Act and decide which portions of the act should to be renewed. One provision, debated before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month, mandates bilingual election material for certain jurisdictions. If an election jurisdiction’s voting population includes more than 5 percent (or, at least 10,000 citizens) of people who speak a single minority language, then bilingual ballots, pamphlets, etc. must be offered.
Those who oppose renewing the bilingual voting provision claim that the government shouldn’t waste resources translating election material, because the test to become a U.S. citizen already mandates a knowledge of reading and understanding the English language. If voters have become U.S. citizens, they must already have a comprehension of the language; therefore, bilingual ballots are unnecessary.
This argument, however, fails to take into account the fact that people without a firm grasp on the English language will be at a disadvantage if election material includes complicated wording or colloquial phrases. Why take a step to make voting more difficult for any portion of the population?
When deciding which parts of the act should be renewed, Congress ought to remember the United State’s historical position as a nation of immigrants. Approving a decision that decreases minority participation in democracy would be a decidedly un-American move. Financial ramifications, and minimal ones at that, should not dictate the disappearance of bilingual election materials.