Immigrants must make an effort EARNEST "effort" to learn English regardless of how tough it is to learn.
I wasn't born in the US, but my parents knew that learning English is the only way for ANY immigrant to achieve any chance of success in our country.
There is no room for excuses that the language is tough to learn.
Eventually learn English, yes but why should motorists be in danger when another motorist cannot understand an English written sign?
There are too many immigrants who come to LIVE HERE PERMANENTLY who lose the incentive to learn English because government coddles them, panders to them and makes things too easy.
Those Korean, German, Swahili, whatever the background, when they come here TEMPORARILY to lead their respective companies ALREADY know English well enough to take the exam in English. Current state law in TN allows a foreigner who is here LEGALLY to drive with their respective license.
It is when they choose, decide or evoke to live in the U.S. permanently that the exam must be administered in English.
Since there’s been talk about unfriendly, allow me to share this academic study conducted on diversity in a public school classroom by Barbara Gross Davis of UC Berkeley and Hall and Sandier, 1982. Titled: Is there adversity in diversity?
Don't try to "protect" any “one” group of students. Don't refrain from criticizing the performance of individual students in your class on account of their ethnicity or gender. If you attempt to favor or protect a given group of students by demanding less of them, you are likely to produce the opposite effect: such treatment undermines students' self-esteem and their view of their abilities and competence therefore creating an adversarial or hostile environment.
For example, one faculty member mistakenly believed she was being considerate to the students of color in her class by giving them extra time to complete assignments. Good intentions, drastic effects. She failed to realize that this action would cause hurt feelings on all sides: the students she was hoping to help felt patronized, and the rest of the class resented the preferential treatment.
Speaks volumes about coddling immigrants with respect to a driver’s license exam.
Cheatham County, TN
It is amazing how many people just miss the big picture regarding the driver's license bill.
And even more, choose to ridicule other Americans.
The POINT here is to ensure all who wish to drive in our country, our state on a permanent basis understand English to ensure safety.
Do you think a foreign country will permit you to take the license in that country in English? Check the facts and you'll be surprised that you will have to learn another language if you want to live there.
I have an angle worth pursuing and certainly looking forward to engaging the liberals.
Would it be far-fetched that the liberals and Democrats are against the English language laws because they fear that if immigrants [who are here legally] learn English rather than continue to speak their native language and NEVER really learn English would become smarter, wiser and be able to speak for themselves?
Or is it that the liberals want these immigrants to stay "dumbed-down" so that they always need translators and interpreters and never really get to see who is behind the Wizard of Oz's curtain?
Open the flood gates of debate!
Today was a great day for our country and for Tennessee.
Most members of this committee stood up for our country with an 8-1 vote, with state Senator Barnes of Clarksville voting no.
Senator Barnes stated that many spouses of the military stationed at Ft. Campbell cannot or will never be able to learn English and therefore passing this legislation is unfair to them. Are you kidding me?
A spouse married to a member of our U.S. military not wanting to or caring to learn English?
That spouse wants to reap the benefits of our country, our military and all that goes along with that BUT doesn't care to learn English.....Please!
This legislation is about public safety. All the rhetoric about foreigners and executives and especially their spouses is a weak argument. Those people who are legally here with a valid visa can currently drive with their licenses.
Despite the opposition and the Catholic church, which has a slew of its own issues, offering unsubstantiated and scare points, this issue ensures that all motorists who want to drive will either step up to the "steering wheel" and learn English or not be granted a license. A senator asked about those who are hearing impaired but there wasn't anyone from the department of safety to address the inquiry.
In addition to this being a public safety issue, the state cannot spend upwards or in excess of $ 250,000 to cover the exam in other languages when our children's curriculum is being cut from offering arts, music and physical education.
Moreover, it was discussed in the Senate transportation committee that our very own Tennessee Highway Patrol and troopers are in danger each and every day not from criminals, but that the communications system is below standard or adequate to provide troopers the means to communicate with the command center.
If you live in Tennessee and are concerned that the safety of motorists and Tennesseans is being pushed aside for being friendly or accommodating to foreigners, then contact your state legislator at the General Assembly.
We have laws to deal with someone who causes an injury or death because they drove impaired or recklessly. There isn't a method for someone to address a friend's, a relative's injury or death because a motorist couldn't understand an English written road sign. Are we to give them a free pass to be friendly?
Act now or forever hold your peace.
Don't we have a great country where we can disagree on issues? But disagree in the English language.
The fact is Ms. Price that the people for whom you refer are here temporarily and they can already drive with their respective country's license. My point has been and still is that ONCE YOU declare that you want to remain in the "my" country (cause you seem to be in another) you MUST take OUR driver's license exam in ENGLISH!
And unless you've just awakened on our soil, here in the USA driving is a privilege not a right.
If you disagree with that, fine--your prerogative, but you're at a loss. Why don't you sue the state on the grounds that your rights have been violated because you have to take an exam to get a license and register your vehicle. I'd love to have that case precedence.
Have an enjoyable week in our beloved state. Oh, don't get into an accident caused by someone who couldn't understand the English written road sign down the street.
It's disgusting and an embarrassment to those reporters who exercise journalistic ethics, fair reporting and unbiased writing that this article's author chose to omit and neglect information I supplied him referencing the so-called SPLC center and it's purported mission of doing good work in the name of civil rights. Yea sure, explain how their bank accounts and endowment accounts have millions and millions of dollars and most if not all its officers earn large six-figure salaries.
What a sham!
The SPLC’s tactics reflect Dees’ appreciation for the monetary magnetism of ideological intensity. He learned about it as he raised money for the presidential campaigns of George McGovern, Gary Hart, Jimmy Carter, and Ted Kennedy. In 1988, Dees told The Progressive magazine he had hesitated before agreeing to become finance director for Carter’s 1976 presidential campaign because he thought Carter’s moderation would be unattractive to direct mail donors:
"You can’t raise money through the mail for just any candidate,” said Dees. “You’ve got to have a candidate who’s way out on the extremes — a Reagan, a Wallace, a McGovern, a Goldwater. The people who will give big money through the mail are either on the Far Right or the Far Left. They’re true believers. You can’t fire them up with a middle-of-the-road cause or candidate. You’ve got to have someone who can arouse people.”84
The series also showed that Dees was a relentless self-promoter who tolerated no dissent from center staff. Meanwhile, the board of directors consisted of handpicked cronies ready to rubber-stamp his decisions. A former staff attorney who had worked at other non-profits called it “the least independent board of directors I’ve ever seen.”81
Former business partner Millard Fuller said of Dees: “He does not know how to treat people. He leaves a trail of bodies behind him, of broken relationships. It’s just how he treats people.”82
That trail now includes four ex-wives. In 1979, one of them filed divorce-court documents alleging in explicit detail that Dees conducted lurid affairs during their marriage. Dees complained that he was the victim of a vicious and reckless campaign, charging that his second wife had:
engaged in numerous evidentiary forays that can be described as old fashioned “cheap shots.” Her strategy was to accuse the husband of every inflammatory act she could imagine, hoping that it would prejudice the court. Her approach was to present a bald-faced allegation and then let the husband try to disprove the charges. The accusations are very similar to the old unanswerable cliché, “When did you stop beating your wife?”83
Dees’ critics, including but not limited to the white supremacist groups with which he has done battle, have gleefully spread those charges via the Internet. It is ironic that an organization led by a man who has felt the sting of such charges has played a central role in a highly public campaign of cheap shots and character assassination.
• The SPLC had moved away from its early work in such poverty law fields as death-penalty cases, employment rights, and voting rights because Dees had learned that he could take in more money by exaggerating the size and menace of the Klan. An editorial that accompanied the series said that while the Klan “deserves the scorn of all reasonable people,” it had become “a farce” and that center critics were justified in saying that it “focuses on the anti-Klan theme not because the Klan is a major threat, but because it plays well with liberal donors.”77 “The market is still wide open for the product, which is black pain and white guilt,” said one of the SPLC’s disillusioned former attorneys, a black woman.78
• Black attorneys who had worked at the center complained of systematic discrimination against them at the center. Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree said: “My students have come back with disappointing experiences…. It’s particularly disappointing to encounter racism at a civil rights organization.”79
• The SPLC raised huge amounts of money from fundraising campaigns that described urgent needs but used much of the money to pile up an enormous endowment and pay handsome salaries to its top executives.
• Three organizations that monitored charities nationwide “criticized the Law Center for misleading donors and spending too little on programs.”80 Donors to the SPLC often had no idea of its vast wealth and were duped into thinking that it was tottering on the brink of financial disaster. In fact, it operated from an office building so stylish that local wags sarcastically called it “The Poverty Palace.”