MALDEF ACTION ALERT!!!

________________________________________
1717 K Street NW, Suite 311, Washington, DC 20036 Office: 202-293-2828

ACTION ALERT

Call on Congress to Renew the Language Assistance Provisions of the Voting Rights Act!

Often called the most effective piece of civil rights legislation ever enacted in the United States, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 has been instrumental in ensuring that all eligible voters, regardless of race or language ability, may participate on a fair and equal basis in U.S. elections. Crucial “temporary provisions” of the Act are set to expire, however, and their renewal is among MALDEF’s top federal legislative priorities.

From the Latino perspective, among the most critical of the Act’s temporary provisions are the language assistance provisions contained within Section 203 and 4(f)(4) of the Act. These provisions require election officials to provide written and oral language assistance to eligible voters who live in jurisdictions where there are large concentrations of language minority voters (including Spanish-speaking Latinos) who have suffered discrimination on the basis of language.

The language assistance provisions of the Voting Rights Act have made democracy real for language minority citizens in covered jurisdictions by guaranteeing equal access to comprehensible election materials. Section 203 and 4(f)(4), which effectively remove language ability as a barrier to voting, are essential to permit all eligible voters to participate fully in the democratic process by casting informed and meaningful ballots in U.S. elections.

MALDEF has joined forces with our partners in the civil rights community to ensure that the language assistance provisions of the Voting Rights Act, which are currently set to expire, are renewed for an additional 25 years. MALDEF strongly urges those concerned with Latinos’ continued fair and equal access to the ballots to contact their senators and representatives in Congress and urge them to renew the Voting Rights Act, including its language assistance provisions. You may reach all Senators and U.S. Representatives Congresspersons by calling the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121.

A list of “Frequently Asked Questions” is attached to this Action Alert to more fully inform interested parties about the relevant features of the language assistance provisions of the Voting Rights Act. For further information, please contact Peter Zamora, MALDEF Legislative Attorney, at 202-293-2828 or go to www.renewthevra.org.



FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS RE: THE LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROVISIONS OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT

1. What is the purpose/intent of Section 203?

In 1975, Congress permanently banned the use of literacy tests and other similar registration and voting practices, including the use of English-only materials in certain jurisdictions, in any election nationwide. Congress also broadened the scope of voting rights protection to include limited English proficient voters of Asian American, Hispanic, and American Indian or Alaskan Native descent. Congress found these groups had historically faced, and continued to face, discrimination based on their race and ethnicity. Based upon these findings, Congress enacted Section 203.

2. What does Section 203 do?

Section 203 provides U.S. citizens in covered jurisdictions who are not yet fluent in English the opportunity to be informed voters and participate effectively in our representative democracy by requiring election officials to provide language assistance to such citizens.

3. Which minority populations are covered by Section 203?

Section 203 applies to four minority groups: American Indians, Asian Americans, Alaskan Natives, and Latinos.

4. Why are these groups covered?

Congress has repeatedly found that these four language minority groups face discrimination based on race, ethnicity or national origin. Discriminatory voting practices and procedures systematically denied these covered groups their voting rights. This discrimination still exists today. In the 2004 elections, Asian American and Latino voters were singled out because of their “foreign-sounding names” or “foreign appearance” and faced challenges to their eligibility to vote and illegal requests for identification. Native American voters were similarly singled out and illegally required to provide identification during these elections.

5. When is a jurisdiction covered under Section 203?

A jurisdiction is covered under Section 203 where the number of limited English proficient United States citizens of voting age in a single language group within the jurisdiction who are Asian, Hispanic or Native American:

• Is more than 10,000, or
• Is more than five percent of all voting-age citizens, or
• Exceeds five percent of all reservation residents on an Indian reservation; and
• Has an illiteracy rate higher than the national illiteracy rate.

6. How many jurisdictions are affected by Section 203?

According to the Census Bureau’s 2002 determination of covered jurisdictions, there are 219 jurisdictions out of a total of more than 3,000 that must provide language assistance to Spanish speakers. There are sixteen jurisdictions that must provide language assistance to Asian Americans (some in multiple Asian languages) and 87 that must provide language assistance to Alaskan Natives or Native Americans (some in multiple languages). Additionally, under Section 4(f)(4) of the Voting Rights Act, three states in their entirety (Alaska, Arizona and Texas) and a total of nineteen counties or townships in six other states must provide language assistance similar to that provided under Section 203.

7. What is required under Section 203?

Any election information provided in English must also be provided in the language of the covered minority group. Election information includes registration or voting notices, forms, instructions, ballots, and any other materials or information relating to the electoral process. Where the language of a covered minority group has no written form, the state or locality is only required to provide oral instructions, information, and assistance.

In addition to providing translated election information, compliance with Section 203 requires that the information be effectively disseminated to covered language minority groups. Communication can be facilitated by posting public notices, publicizing the availability of language assistance materials through mainstream and ethnic media, and providing bilingual poll workers at polling places who can assist voters.

8. Does Section 203 work?

Yes, Section 203 works to overcome barriers to voting and increases the political participation by and electoral representation of minority groups.

For example, in San Diego County, voter registration among Latinos and Filipinos rose over 20 percent after the Department of Justice (DOJ) enforced Section 203 requirements. During that same period, Vietnamese registrations increased by 40 percent after the county agreed to provide language assistance in Vietnamese.

In Harris County, Texas, the turnout among Vietnamese American eligible voters doubled following the DOJ’s efforts to remedy the county’s failure to provide Vietnamese ballots on its electronic voting machines in 2003. In 2004, the first Vietnamese American was elected to the state legislature when he defeated the incumbent by 16 votes.

9. Is Section 203 still needed?

Yes, Section 203 is still needed. Discrimination on the basis of language minority status continues to be prevalent today. The gap between minority and white voters in registration and turnout remains in the double-digits for the Asian American, Latino, and Native American communities. Combined with the tendency toward racial bloc voting in many districts (where voters choose candidates who are almost exclusively of their own race/ethnicity), it becomes even more difficult for minorities to elect representatives of their choice.

Certain poll workers continue to be hostile to minority voters who cannot speak English fluently. There is evidence that some supporters of white candidates challenge and intimidate minority voters based on their race, national origin or ethnicity. Barriers continue to restrict access to voting for many language minorities, which limits their civic engagement and political participation.

10. Do bilingual elections promote cultural separatism?

No. Bilingual elections promote the integration and political participation of people who had previously been excluded from the political process due to their lack of fluency in English.

11. Why should we help language minorities who are citizens – shouldn’t they be able to read and write English fluently?

The United States encourages people who have been in this country for a substantial period of time and who have been contributing to society to be civically engaged. As a result, certain persons are exempt from English literacy requirements when applying for citizenship, such as the elderly who have resided in the United States for a lengthy period of time, the physically or developmentally disabled, and certain Hmong veterans who helped to save American lives during the Vietnam War and came to the United States as refugees. The limited availability of English language acquisition programs, especially for adults, continues to impede language minority citizens’ ability to develop the level of fluency in English required to fully understand complicated election materials.

Voting can be an intimidating and complicated process, even for voters whose first language is English. For new citizens whose first language is not English, the voting process is even more difficult to maneuver. Without language assistance, many eligible voters may simply decide not to vote rather than to ask for help – especially when they are ridiculed when they try to ask for help. For many new citizens, one of the greatest treasures received from becoming a U.S. citizen is the right to vote – a right that many may not have received in the country of their birth. For our democracy to flourish, all of its stakeholders must be permitted to fully participate.

12. Does it cost a lot to provide bilingual assistance?

No. Where Section 203 is implemented properly, bilingual assistance accounts for only a small fraction of total elections costs. For example, Los Angeles County spent only 4% of its total election budget on language assistance in 1996 when it supported five language minority groups (Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese, and Filipino).

In a 2005 study of election officials in the 31 states covered by Section 203, 39.5% reported that they incur no additional costs for providing language assistance. Further, 54.2 percent of responding jurisdictions reported that they incur no additional costs for providing written bilingual election materials.