According to Newt Gingrich and John Fonte it is, apparently, working to assimilate all immigrants as quickly as possible, and this entails forcing them to learn English as quickly as possible. To this end there should be no ballots in foreign languages. As they put it, "If we all vote in English, the message is e pluribus unum: It says we are all in this together." (The use of Latin in their call for all-English all the time doesn't seem to strike them as odd.)
The basis of their fear is that fewer immigrants are learning English. This is simply wrong. For example, in 1890 3.62% of the population was non-English speaking; by 1990 that percentage had dropped to 0.80%. (For some detailed data on this trend see, e.g., James Crawford's discussion.) The "problem" they see is not much of a problem at all, and it is getting to be less and less of a problem as years go by. As Crawford points out, "The rate of linguistic assimilation is clearly accelerating?"
The Republicans today propose all sorts of draconian measures against immigrants, based partly on their false understanding of basic facts of American history.
Some 47 million Americans 5 and older used a language other than English in 2000, the bureau said. That translates into the nearly one in five, compared with roughly one in seven 10 years ago.
This is a shameful tactic. If they really wanted to help with assimilation, they could be asking to expand ESL programs. Or have outreach programs that teach American history and government to immigrants.
Most immigrants who can learn English, do so. This is an English society, and one needs the language to get anything done. Without knowing how to speak English, there are only very few jobs available to people.
The ones who don't learn in many cases can't do it. They may be barely literate in their own language. Or they have learning problems that prevent them from acquiring another language. Or they just work too many hours to be able to make it to a school and do the course work. But even if hey can't speak the language themselves, they make a point of having their children learn it.
And let me stress history and civics again. Many immigrants come from countries that lack the democratic institutions that this country has. And learning about them can be an empowering experience.
And U.S. history may not be perfect, but one of its major themes is its move towards justice. Powerful too, once one gets it.
My husband's grandparents emigrated to the US in 1908 and neither could speak a word of English...ever. But their children learned English yet still conversed with their parents in their native tongue at home. Their grandson, my husband, is one of the most well-versed, well-read, intelligent persons I've ever known. And he speaks some French and German, also!
Most immigrants know that it is in their best advantage to learn English, and most who can do so.
I do maintain that it takes longer to get how the government works, and this is where history and government programs can help. We already have the citizenship test, which requires basic knowledge from these two areas. Most immigrants end up knowing a lot more about the government than most Americans this way. :)
But I will admit that many won't "get" the U.S. system until much later. Many don't even know that they can right to their congress people or give them a call. Or they don't know that they can participate in political activity without fearing personal harm.
But if assimilation was an urgent worry, then best way of delivering that information to Spanish speakers will probably be through a telenovela. :) Mexico has made historic telenovelas about Mexican history, so I don't see why there can't be some made about American history too.