'English for the Children' Was 'David v. Goliath' Victory

A "David and Goliath victory" is how Dr. Rosalie Pedalino Porter describes the passage of Question 2, the November ballot initiative that eliminated transitional bilingual education programs and replaced them with English-immersion classes.

At the invitation of area Republicans, Porter, a co-chair of the Massachusetts "English for the Children" campaign, offered an after-the-upset analysis at the Jones Library in her home town of Amherst recently. She began by reminding the audience that an unusually high percentage of Massachusetts voters (68%) favored Question 2. She admitted, however, that she initially believed that Bay State voters would not scrap the nation's oldest bilingual education law. "Massachusetts, I thought, would never vote for such a change, but when the idea was proposed that we start a campaign here, I couldn't resist. I had to join it," Porter, a former bilingual education teacher in the Springfield public school system, tells MassNews.
		Dr. Porter met with Western Massachusetts Republicans and offered an after-the-upset analysis of the successful campaign to eliminate bilingual education in the Massachusetts school system.

She has been an advocate of English immersion classes for young immigrants for the past seventeen years and explained that a ballot initiative was the only recourse left for reformers. They had been unsuccessful in convincing the Massachusetts legislature to pass a new law. She described the tactics employed by the opposition during these long years to undermine their efforts, as "bizarre."

"I made a statement in favor of changing the law. Several classes of high school students sitting in the balcony - they all cheered. Then their teacher turned around and told them, in Spanish, what they should be thinking, and they all booed. These kids were all in bilingual programs. They had not understood what I said, because I said it in English. "Porter was speaking of the time she went to the State House to present testimony on behalf of a bilingual education reform bill.

She explained that the Question 2 campaign began in 2001 when Ron Unz, a California businessman and Harvard College graduate, offered the Massachusetts "English for the Children" campaign the money ($265,000) needed for the signature-collection portion of the campaign. (They got 85,000 signatures from registered voters which were required to put this question on the ballot.) The next stage got underway when Porter and the co-chairs, Cuban-born Lincoln Tamayo and Boston University professor Christine Rossell, began to publicly debate the ballot initiative.

"We went to speak all over the state. We met with groups. We wrote pieces for newspapers. We appeared on television and on radio," says Porter of the trio's work. Their foes, the teachers' unions and left-wing Latino activists, fought back -- hard.

"The opposition spent four times as much as we did. They spent it on ads. The teachers' unions put up hundreds of thousands of dollars to defeat this question. They had volunteers all over the state. They had signs," explained Porter. The latter statement is a reference to the controversial "Don't Sue Teachers!" placards that the bilingual education advocates distributed.

Porter brought copies of an op-ed she wrote for the Daily Hampshire Gazette to the Jones Library presentation. In the commentary, she noted that the editorial pages of most newspapers in the state, as well as the deans of eight schools of education, urged a "no" vote for Question 2. In contrast, the English for the Children campaign ran no ads, did no mailings and had no paid staff, except for "providing a small stipend for the chairman [Lincoln Tamayo] and one consultant." However, 328 of the 351 communities in the Commonwealth voted "yes."

Of the overwhelming victory, Porter opined that the people of Massachusetts respond favorably when they're presented with a sensible and clear argument, like 'Teach the kids English."

Beginning in September, local educators will be expected to phase out transitional bilingual education programs, but Porter said that some communities will find ways to circumvent the law. She chided Amherst Town Meeting for voting to petition the state legislature to exempt the town, whose voters rejected Question 2, from complying with the new law. "You could also say, 'Let's petition the State that we don't want [Mitt] Romney to be our governor, because we didn't vote for him in this town.' "

That portion of the discussion caused Marshall Moriarity of Palmer to ask: "Do we roll up our sleeves, and say that the issue is behind us?"

Porter answered by conceding that it would take time to make a successful transition, but that: "We are in a good place." She praised Commissioner of Education David Driscoll and Governor Mitt Romney for their support.

"Mitt Romney is the first politician, Republican or Democrat or Independent, who has come out in favor of English language teaching for immigrant children," said Porter. "Not even our President has."

An Italian immigrant, who arrived in the United States at age six, Porter concluded her talk by observing that English immersion programs enjoy wide support among Latinos, the demographic group for whom bilingual education programs were initially designed.

"I think our leaders are afraid they will lose the Latino vote. But in every survey that has been taken among Mexican-Americans, Cuban-Americans, and Puerto Rican-Americans, an overwhelming number (80-90%) say they want their kids to be taught English right away. And the questions are always asked in English and Spanish, so there's no misunderstanding," she added. "They are in favor of English as the official language of this country, but the leaders of the Latino community have a different agenda."

As for Dr. Rosalie Pedalino Porter ... she plans to remain a children's advocate. "I keep on thinking, 'I'm retired,' but I'll keep on trucking."