Jim Inhofe

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, let me hold off yielding until I get through with what I am about to say. I was going to mention these this morning, but I would like to go ahead and say where I believe we are today in responding to the question that has already been asked. I think it speaks for itself, but let me see after reading these cases whether you agree with that or not.

Mr. INHOFE. No, no. Mr. President, reclaiming my time, it is certainly not our intention. And I think what the Senator is saying is that language and national origin are the same when, in fact, I am not saying that language and national origin are the same. Let me go ahead and try to respond, even though I am speaking to lawyers and I am not one, with some court cases that I think might clarify things for all of us.

Mr. INHOFE. It is mine.

Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. INHOFE. I ask for the regular order.

Mr. INHOFE. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be modified with the changes that are at the desk.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, let me first of all say no, it is not my intent, nor is it the intent of this amendment, to do that. This amendment is pretty straightforward. It does say ``unless otherwise authorized or provided by law.'' What that says to me is if there are some of these privileges out there that you believe are not in the law, then I would not be addressing those. I think what you are talking about is a matter of law, but I don't know that. I would rather say if it is a matter of law, we are providing an exception. And I guess I would ask you the question, since I now have the floor, do you believe that some of these rights are entitlements?

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, one request I would have, if the Senator would yield for a moment.

Mr. INHOFE. Will the Senator yield so I can answer this question?

Mr. INHOFE. First of all, if you look at the second page of the bill, it provides: Unless otherwise authorized or provided by law. . . . So we have that set up for exceptions that are already in law. Now, the Court Interpreters Act was passed in 1978. They did not, prior to that time--there was a problem that corrected. That act, the Court Interpreters Act, protects already existing constitutional rights such as the 6th amendment, the right to confront witnesses speaking against you, and the 5th amendment and 14th amendment and due process. The United States--I think it was in Negron v. New York. That is a Federal case which is often cited to support the right to an interpreter in Federal and State proceedings. So it is Federal and State proceedings. I believe that exception takes care of the problem you have.

Mr. INHOFE. I thank the Senator for that generous offer. I will not make any comments at this time and will wait until our amendment is up. We will discuss it then.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, when Senator Salazar wants to make a correction, I have a correction to make at the same time. We could do that right now, if you want to do it.

Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to add as cosponsors several Senators, including the distinguished senior Senator from West Virginia, Senator Byrd, and Senators Alexander and Kyl.

Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, this is, I believe, a very significant amendment. We have had an opportunity to talk to people who had problems. In addition to making English the national language, we also unify some of the applications in terms of legalized immigrants. I have had the honor of speaking at naturalization ceremonies. It is a very warm thing to know that these people come in and do it the legal way, the right way; wherein they have to, and they do, learn the language. We have some language in here that Senator Alexander had suggested that I think makes this a better bill, and I think Senator Kyl and Senator Sessions also have this language. So it goes beyond that. Basically, what it does is it recognizes the practical reality of the role of English as our national language. It states explicitly that English is our national language, providing English a status in law that it has not had before. It clarifies that there is no entitlement to receive Federal documents and services in languages other than English. It declares that any rights of a person and services or materials in languages other than English must be authorized or provided by law. It recognizes the decades of unbroken court opinions that civil rights laws protecting against national origin and discrimination do not create rights to Government services and materials in languages other than English, and establishes enhanced goals of the DHS as redesigned. This is what I talked about in trying to make those more uniform. I think Senator Alexander wants to make a few comments. I would only say that this is something that is more significant probably to the American people than it is inside this Chamber. I know there is opposition to this. There are some people who don't believe that English should be our national language. If you look at some of the recent polling data, such as the Zogby poll in 2006, it found 84 percent of Americans, including 77 percent of Hispanics, believed that English should be the national language of Government operations. A poll of 91 percent of foreign-born Latino immigrants agreed that learning English is essential to succeeding in accordance with the United States, according to the 2002 Kaiser Family Foundation poll. Also, we heard the other day, when President Bush made his very eloquent statement, he said: An ability to speak and write the English language, English allows newcomers to go from picking crops to opening grocery stores, from cleaning offices to running offices, from a life of low-paying jobs to a diploma, a career, and a home of their own. So I believe this is something very significant that we are doing today that people have talked about now for four decades that I know of, and I believe it should be popular. I yield to the Senator from Arizona.

Mr. INHOFE. I appreciate the comments of the Senator from Arizona, who was very instrumental in coming up with some good language that made this a better piece of legislation. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Frist be added as a cosponsor.

Mr. INHOFE. I thank Senator Sessions for the contributions he has made. You and Senator Alexander have both made contributions, and I think it would be appropriate for me to yield some time to Senator Alexander because he can articulate some of the other areas that we are addressing here, other than English as the national language.

Mr. INHOFE. First of all, I do appreciate as always the very eloquent Senator from Tennessee giving the historic perspective. I think it is important to understand that virtually every President throughout the history of America has made statements to that effect. Teddy Roosevelt said in a speech: We must also learn one language and that language is English. President Clinton said in his speech in 1999, in talking about immigrants: New immigrants have a responsibility to enter the mainstream of American life. That means learning English and learning about our democratic system of government. We heard just the other day in a speech given by our President that it is necessary in order to unify us and to leave all the obstacles that are out there. I thank not just the obvious ones who have been speaking already, but Senator McCain and Senator Graham have been a very important part in making changes, along with Senator Alexander and the occupant of the chair, the junior Senator from Florida. At this time, I would like to hear from Senator Graham. I yield to him whatever time he desires.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, let me respond.

Mr. INHOFE. Reserving the right to object.

Mr. INHOFE. I object.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, it is my understanding--we talked about this before the Senator came in--that we will have two amendments that we will be talking about: the Salazar amendment and the Inhofe amendment. They will be side by side. There will be a vote at 4:15. That vote will take place on my amendment first and then on the Salazar amendment, is my understanding.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I would respond by saying I think the statement stands by itself, speaks for itself. It says, ``unless otherwise authorized or provided by law.'' We are a country of laws, and if there is anything that is inconsistent, that is an exception under section 162.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, let me ask if it would be all right, if you have a number of questions--I don't mind yielding, but I would just as soon yield on your time.

Mr. INHOFE. And for clarification, there would be a vote on the Inhofe amendment at 4:15; is that correct?

Mr. INHOFE. And the vote will take place at 10 o'clock?