Anchorage Daily News

Wednesday, November 4, 1998

Interpretation Differs on English-Only Bid
By ELIZABETH MANNING, Daily News reporter

Walter Analoak is the Inupiaq man you see in televisions ads supporting an initiative that would make English Alaska's official language. An Anchorage bus driver who was raised in Nome, Analoak volunteered for the campaign because learning English helped him.

"Everyone needs to learn English," Analoak said. "That's just the way it is. I speak some Eskimo but I prefer to speak English."

Analoak has no qualms about making English Alaska's official language. And a recent poll shows he isn't alone; 58 percent of 500 Alaskans surveyed by Anchorage pollster David Dittman said they would support the English-language initiative, or Proposition 6. Even in rural areas, 39 percent said they would vote for the measure.

Opponents find that troubling. April Ferguson, general counsel of Bristol Bay Native Corp., said she doesn't know who Dittman called but figures people still don't understand what the initiative would do.

"They're running an ad with a Native gentleman," Ferguson said. "I hope it doesn't confuse people."

Supporters say the measure won't change how the state is run and is simply meant to prevent Alaska from becoming like California, where driver's license exams are administered in 33 languages. Opponents say its effects could be chilling. They claim that Native Alaskans could be forced to stop speaking indigenous languages at public meetings and that bilingual education programs will be hurt. And state employees who happen to know another language would be prevented from speaking it, even if it helps somebody.

One thing is certain: The initiative is vague and, if passed, could wind up in court. The Native American Rights Fund and the Alaska Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union have said they might sue if the measure passes.

A total of 24 states have laws designating English as the state's official language.

Although the proposition calls for state and local agencies to use English in all functions and actions, there are some exceptions that allow the use of other languages: to communicate health and safety information; to teach languages; to promote foreign relations, trade and tourism; and to allow elected officials to speak with constituents.

All state documents are currently printed in English, with a few exceptions, said Bob King, spokesman for Gov. Tony Knowles. King said some salmon-disaster fliers were printed in Yupik and some advertising brochures for the state are printed in Spanish, German and Japanese.

Alaskans for a Common Language, the group pushing the initiative, says those uses of non-English languages could continue under the exemptions. The group says Alaska Native languages would also be exempt from the measure under the 1990 Native American Languages Act, which affords special protections for native languages.

Susan Fischetti, state coordinator of the group, said it's ridiculous for opponents to say that borough or city meetings held in Yupik or Inupiaq would become illegal. If such meetings were challenged in court, she said Alaskans for a Common Language would stand up and defend the meetings.

That doesn't make opponents feel better. Benjamin Nagaek, mayor of Barrow, raised concerns about the initiative in an analysis of the initiative sent in May to Lt. Gov. Fran Ulmer. One of Nageak's main points is that Native languages may not be protected under the measure.

Jennifer Rudinger of the ACLU agrees. She said the Native American Languages Act was crafted as a policy statement only, with no provision for legal action.

Because of those concerns, Ulmer refused to include a clause in the ballot language saying Native languages would be protected under the Native American Languages Act, as initiative supporters wanted.

A suit filed by Alaskans for a Common Language to have the reference included and to change the title of the measure was unsuccessful.

Anchorage School District officials also have raised questions about the initiative. Specifically, they're concerned that language immersion programs might be affected. Lawyers who studied the issue for the district said the outcome of the measure is unclear.

Two groups have formed to fight the initiative. Alaskans Against English Only has raised $21,506. A Fairbanks group called Nix on Six has raised about $2,000.

On record opposing the initiative are the Hispanic Organized Leaders of Alaska, the Tanana Chiefs Conference, the Alaska Native Brotherhood, the Association of Village Council Presidents, the Alaska Chapter of the ACLU, the Native American Rights Fund, most of the state's regional Native corporations and dozens of villages and tribal councils.

"This law is not just a symbolic statement like naming a state bird or flower," said Eric Johnson, an attorney for the Native American Rights Fund during a recent radio interview. "We believe this measure is motivated by fear and xenophobia and could have devastating effects, especially in rural Alaska."

Opponents have repeatedly asked why Alaskans for a Common Language is trying to fix something that isn't broken.

Ferguson of the Bristol Bay Corp. said the measure isn't needed, especially in a state where Natives have struggled to hold onto to their language and culture. "People of my parents' generation remember being beaten for speaking their own language," Ferguson said.

But Ferguson said it also bothers her that initiative supporters have made exceptions for Native Alaskans, while remaining silent on how the measure would affect other minorities.

So far, Alaskans for a Common Language has raised and spent about $52,177 on the campaign. Most of that money has been contributed by U.S. English, a group based in Washington, D.C., that has actively worked on initiatives or laws in 20 states to designate English as the official language. U.S. English has 3,000 members in Alaska. The group also is trying to pass an English-language law in Utah this year.

Members of Alaskans for a Common Language say they have a hard time understanding the bitterness of the opposition. It's important, supporters argue, for the United States to recognize English as its official language because it is the glue that binds a nation of immigrants together. And immigrants do better when they know English.

"No one loses anything here," Fischetti said. "This isn't aimed at anyone specifically. It's aimed at government. This is just a cost effective way to run government while empowering people to learn English. I don't see why it's a problem."

Reporter Elizabeth Manning can be reached at emanning@adn.com. The Associated Press contributed to this story

This bill requires the state to use English in all government functions and actions. State records must be in English. "The state" means the Legislature, all state agencies, local governments, school districts, public corporations and the university. Those entities may use non-English languages for international trade, emergencies, teaching languages, court suits, criminal inquiries, for elected officials to talk to constituents or to comply with federal law. Costs of non-English records must be identified. Persons who speak only English may not be denied state jobs or services. The bill does not affect private sector use of non-English languages.