Part of their complaint was that the proposed amendment does nothing to address the issue of illegal immigration. Of course it doesn't; the amendment has nothing to do with immigration. It has to do with affirming the English language as the standard of communication for official acts of the county and metropolitan government. It is a  standard built on centuries of practical experience and application, and one that applies equally and uniformly to people of all creeds, races, and places of national origin, whether they are here legally or illegally.

The educators made much of the fact that Metro government provides services in "several different languages," but overlooked the fact that the practice is inherently discriminatory.

I am a native of India. In my home country, there are as many as twenty different languages spoken, which is reflected in the community of Indian immigrants here in Nashville. This is one illustration of why it is impossible for the local government to attempt to cater to the native language needs of ALL immigrants. To cater only to certain immigrants, though, is discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Providing free translation assistance also nullifies the primary incentive for immigrants to learn the communication system of the culture they have come to, and impedes, not advances, their productive integration into the society. English is our national language: the very founding documents of our nation and all of its laws are cast in it. It is our national treasure. It is to be honored, respected, and protected.

Furthermore, linguistic divisions are as dangerous as racial and religious divisions. A few examples of linguistic conflicts are  Kurdistan (Kurdish, Arabic, Persian, and Turkish), Sri Lanka (Sinhalese and Tamil), Canada (English and French), Belgium (Flemish and French), and Spain (Spanish and Basque nationalists). The by- product of multi culturalism is racial, ethnic, religious, and linguistic conflicts. By not having an official language we are paving a road for just such future linguistic conflicts right here in the United States, and they already are manifest.

Non-English speaking immigrants create ghettos, and more often than not they are most exploited by the people of same ethnic culture wha happen to speak English well and assimilate well in American society.  By not demanding foreigners who relocate here to learn English, we are creating ghetto mind-sets. We already see the the detrimental effects in the rise of Hispanic gangs, Kurdish gangs, Asian gangs and others.

Eric Crafton, who authored the English-only amendment, is not a  reactionary; he is a visionary. He sees the worrisome likelihood for just such conflicts and problems to expand and worsen, as they inevitably must, as they have in every multi-lingual country. We need to be just Americans, not hyphenated Americans, and his amendment supports the common bond of a language that unifies us as Americans, the language that is our heritage as Americans.

The educators who wrote the letter in opposition, though, opined that his amendment would "negatively impact" international businesses relocating to Middle Tennessee. Nissan and similar other corporations chose Tennessee for our work ethic, low taxes, low crime, and pro-business environment, not for translation services.

The educators further complained that if the amendment were passed, "city health-care providers would be prevented from communicating with their patient in the patient's language." Nothing could be further from the truth. The amendment unequivocally states: "The  Metro Council may make specific exceptions to protect public health and safety."

The educators also claimed that if the English-only amendment passes, "challenges facing immigrants will go from being 'difficult to overcome' to being 'impossible to overcome.'" I find this to be unfounded hyperbole. While I don't wish to personalize an important public issue, I do stand as living proof that an immigrant certainly can overcome what they characterize as "impossible." I am not alone. Millions of immigrants have come to this country and learned its language and become productive citizens.

Rather than champion an existing burdensome and discriminatory system, wouldn't it be more productive for these nine leading educators to use their considerable resources and influence to help form community coalitions and centers to address their concerns for immigrant populations? Who is better poised than these presidents of our local colleges and universities to spearhead responsible private programs that reach out to and serve all immigrants and foreign guests?

I propose that these academic leaders help to create a non-profit Center for Translation and Interpretation that works with local government and with the help of all immigrant communities living in Davidson County. In the final analysis, it is only immigrant communities that need and could provide qualified translators and interpreters. This could provide education and jobs for immigrants as interpreters and translators, as well as programs teaching English as a second language, all deriving to the benefit of the community as a whole, and supporting local government, not becoming parasitic on it.

In closing their letter, the educators wrote: "The irony of the city  known as the 'Athens of the South' becoming the first major metropolitan community in America to pass 'English only' is a distressing prospect."

More distressing—and even more ironic: the educators are unaware that in Athens, as in all of Greece, Greek is the official language, exactly as the amendment at issue seeks appropriately to affirm English as the official language here.

I hope they will accept the challenge to become leaders in developing within our communities effective programs and organizations to address these situations at a grassroots level. I certainly would do all I could to help support such an effort.

Meanwhile, I urge everyone to vote "YES!" on the English-only amendment.

Sincerely,

Vijay Kumar