Hayworth's overblown rhetoric insults Arizona Tribes

Richard Ruelas has this recent column in AZ Republic:

Rep. J.D. Hayworth is considered a friend to Arizona's tribes. But sometimes they don't speak the same language. Sometimes, for example, Hayworth speaks in overblown rhetoric and ends up insulting centuries of language and tradition.

Such was the case when Hayworth signed a letter written by Rep. Steve King, complaining about multilingual ballots. The unspoken target was Spanish speakers, a political can't-miss these days.

But the words ricocheted toward the reservations in Hayworth's district.

The letter bemoaned a "linguistic divide" in the country. It also said government actions like printing ballots in different languages "contradict the 'Melting Pot' ideal" and are a "serious affront" to previous generations of immigrants who learned English.

Applied to recent immigrants from Mexico, those statements reflect a mind-set on the border debate.

Applied to the Indian reservations in Arizona, those statements sound as if Hayworth is against tribal members speaking Navajo or Hopi or Apache.

Talk of different languages hurting the ideals of the United States just doesn't translate.

...a study released by two Arizona State University professors found that the need for those translated materials in Arizona is highest among Native American voters.

The report, available at www.renewthevra.org, surveyed Native American voters in Coconino County during the 2004 election. It found that about half of those needing help to vote relied on the government.

And since Navajo is a traditionally oral language, the multilingual ballot would take the form of a translator talking the voter through the ballot.

But, apparently, the vision of an elderly Navajo woman having a ballot explained to her in a language she can understand goes against the "Melting Pot" ideal and adds to the "linguistic divide."

Basically, Hayworth's "overblown rhetoric" has again caught his foot in his mouth. Trying to "talk tuff" against illegal immigrants and play to his radical rightwing base, he's taken a position that clearly places him at odds with the linguistic diversity that is a key part of our very concept of what it means to be a "melting pot".

As a senior administrator in a faith-based development organization working among minority language communities, I've faced a lot of Hayworths who think that the best thing to do is to have minority languages suppressed or ignored by the majority group. They use their position of power to effectively undermine minorities by arguing that their language (as a major part of their culture) should be discarded as a part of "assimilation" into the larger community.

From my experience, and from the experience of thousands of my colleagues working for over 70 years in over 2,000 minority language groups throughout the world, I can say without a doubt that the issues are vast and complex, and there are no simple solutions.

But one thing is sure: Hayworth's simplistic, demagogic rhetoric is just contributing the problem.