In Russell Contreras' most recent column on the Republican Party's dismal future in California, he made several good points. However, I have a counterpoint or two to make myself. While the Republican Party's goals do not coincide with Mr. Contreras', that is not to say that they are against many of the values that all Californian and American Latinos hold dear.
For instance, the Republican Party's beliefs strongly bind with hard work and family values, which are two things that Latinos historically promote. Understandably, the more liberal Latinos would not agree with this, but they are not necessarily representative of Latino views as a whole.
The second thing I would like to address is his passing mention of Proposition 219. I fail to understand how that directly relates to bilingual education (as Proposition 219 is simply a measure to make California propositions mandates and to prohibit any area in California from ignoring those propositions that pass). Proposition 227 on the California ballot, on the other hand, would indeed take serious steps towards ending bilingual education.
Contrary to Mr. Contreras' insinuation, the initial force behind Proposition 227 is not anti-Latino. The head chairman, Ron Unz, though a conservative, was an outspoken opponent of proposition 187, which denied schooling and health care for illegal immigrants. Another vocal proponent of the measure is the legendary calculus teacher portrayed in Stand and Deliver, Jaime Escalante. Mr. Contreras seems to be under the impression that this is an attempt by the white population in California to make the dissenting Latino population assimilate. Perhaps that is so. However, that comment implies that California Latinos are uniformly against the measure, which is simply not the case. In every poll I've seen, I have yet to discover any one of them to suggest there is a mandate by the Latino community to kill the Proposition. In a recent state-wide poll, the California Latinos voted 46% for and 45% against. Results from the polls vary, but I have yet to see any that claim 50% or more Latinos are against the measure.
Why is this the case? Russell would probably state that those who are for the measure are simply uninformed about what the bill is trying to accomplish. That may have been the case in November, when Latino support for the proposition was rivaling Anglo support; however, since then more information has come out (in English and in Spanish) and people have a greater understanding of what the bill is about. The bill is an attempt to correct a terribly run bilingual education system in California and has pledged $50 million a year to do so.
Since it is a California measure that won't directly affect Texas, I am neither for nor against Proposition 227. I don't believe it's intentions are bad, as it attempts to correct a California bilingual program in which 95 percent of students coming out of the system unable to speak English proficiently. What I do question, though, is the stripping away of local direction of public schools. I don't know that Sacramento should direct school districts across the large and demographically diverse state of California, just as I don't think that Austin should have such control over a similarly large and diverse state. What I can support is a full understanding of what it is trying to accomplish before making a blind condemnation of it. Anyone wishing to further educate themselves on California Proposition 227 can check out www.onenation.org and http://primary98.ss. ca.gov/VoterGuide/Propositions/227.htm (California's official voter's guide to the proposition).
That being said, Russell's initial point is well noted and is indeed correct as Latino membership in the Republican party is falling. As time goes on, though, I do believe that the Republican Party will start emphasizing the issues which coincide with those of Latinos instead of the issues that are serving to alienate them right now. Political expediency decides what issues are emphasized more than racism will, and once measures like Proposition 209 are inexpedient, they will stop being pushed for.
R. Alex Whitlock, freshman information
systems technology major
Letters to the editor are welcomed from all members of the UH community. Letters should be typed and must include the author's name, telephone number and affiliation with the university. Anonymous letters will not be published, although names may be withheld upon request. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, grammar, profanity and personal attacks.
Letters may be delivered to
Room 151 of the Communication Building, or may be e-mailed to allstrom@bayou.uh.edu.