Will Gwinnett and Hall Counties Provide Voting Materials in Spanish?
If the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials and advocacy group LatinoJustice have their way, then yes.
A report in The AJC says their cases rests on their reading of a provision of the Voting Rights Act.
Jerry Gonzalez, GALEO’s executive director, said providing Spanish-language ballots would make it easier for many people to vote.
“It’s about enforcing the Voting Rights Act and ensuring voters – U.S. citizens – have access to voting, to the full extent that the Voting Rights Act provides,” Gonzalez said.
We don’t have an official language in the U.S. so I can’t get too terribly wrapped up about what language our voting materials are in. I can’t see why doing something that isn’t illegal and creates a more level playing field for all Americans to exercise their right to full democratic participation is a bad thing.
Oh, right. Democrats might get elected.
About Author
edatlanta
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
And if Hall County Latinos ever get organized, a lot of Democrats might get elected.
Anyone communicating only in a language foreign to the country they live in probably won’t enjoy the full benefits in the secular world of making a living.
Those that support middle man communication benefit from keeping them second class citizens by “representing” them.
I am all for ballot access, both for voters and candidates. However, I have a very serious question: Would this necessitate a Spanish speaking person to be on-site for both early voting and for each poll location?
Heck Lawton most of us can’t translate into straight English what the typical obfuscated topic really means – 🙂
And that’s the problem. Programming Spanish instruction screens is easy, and frankly, could be done statewide for about the same cost as doing it in Hall and Gwinnett. Having people on site is expensive–and there’s no guarantee that elections officials could find enough of them to man each of Gwinnett’s 156 precincts and eight (I think) early voting locations.
Let’s say we decided we want to do this. How would it be done? Which languages – how many?
For the voting itself, I wouldn’t think it would be that difficult to offer a screen at the beginning for people to select their language and then have the information presented in whatever language they choose. Most things (except the amendments) would be a “one-time” translation — the names would change year over year but they would be the same for all languages anyway. For the initial registration paper … hmmm …. not sure of a good way to handle multiple languages for that — maybe have a printer to print non-English versions as needed?
I guess my other question is – how many people are eligible to vote and can’t read enough English to do so? How are things handled today for English-speaking people who can’t read – does that point to a currently available mechanism that would work?
Good points, Jean. What languages and how many? What happened to that “one nation” thing? And how many foreign nationals have been through the immigration and naturalization process, have taken the oath of citizenship and earned the right to vote — yet still do not know how to speak English? That doesn’t seem likely. Naturalized citizens are probably bilingual, able to read the Constitution and American history basics that have been required in the citizenship process.
I read the full article and it only showed total Latino numbers, not how many are adults nor how many are actually US citizens with voting rights. Shouldn’t somebody figure out how many Latinos in Hall and Gwinnett are here legally and have gone through the US citizenship process, thus having the right to vote in the first place? Then figure out how many of those naturalized citizens cannot speak English (which I can’t imagine being many if any), see what that number is, before rushing to spend tax money on a problem we haven’t proven exists?
If there are indeed any US citizens who couldn’t read the immigration and naturalization paperwork, addressing what would have to be a very small number makes more sense. Foreign nationals living here illegally don’t have the right to vote in US elections, whether or not they speak English. So we can’t go on raw numbers.
It seems common sense is not all that common. This sounds like an ill-conceived notion by the New York nonprofit “Latino Justice” trying to justify their existence and raise donations.
The naturalization test is also given in foreign languages.
– “Anyone communicating only in a language foreign to the country they live in”. It’s not really like that. Most of the folks we are talking about will speak some English, maybe just not very well. And if they have the right to vote, and we can make a small effort to help them understand the details, why not?
If having Spanish speaking people on site is a problem, then no, we don’t do it. End of problem.
Jean- One more language- Spanish. Not too complicated. Don’t make it harder than it is.
Many states already do this. It is not hard, not complicated, not expensive. The Feds actually MAKE some counties do it, and if we don’t volunteer to do it, eventually they will probably make us do it too.