'English for the Children': Rhetorical transcendence and language ideology in California's Proposition 227

Proposition 227, or "English for the Children" was a California ballot initiative created with the purpose of eliminating the state's bilingual education programs and replacing them with English-only instruction. Although many observers construed the law as simply one in a series of efforts to roll back immigrants' language access rights, the measure diverged from previous restrictive legislation in its rhetorical embrace of immigrants. Its author, Ron Unz, constructed his campaign around the notion that government support of bilingual education was preventing immigrant children from learning English, thereby denying them opportunities and, in a broader sense, undermining societal unity by fostering linguistic divisiveness. This rhetorical approach proved effective; on June 2, 1998, voters approved Proposition 227 by a margin of sixty one to thirty nine percent.;By explaining the historical and political factors animating "English for the Children," this thesis argues that California's bilingual education debate was not merely a disagreement over teaching methodologies, but reflected a deeper, longstanding ideological conflict between competing visions of 'national identity' and how language fits into this scheme. The purpose of this study is descriptive as well as analytical. Via a narration of the main events and forces shaping language ideology in the U.S., it will first establish a historical and conceptual background through which the language issue can be analyzed. This will be followed by a thorough discussion of California's peculiar plebiscitary process, which has exacerbated social tensions and contributed to the polarization of the electorate. Using a symbolic interactionist framework, I then make the case that the convergence of these factors laid the groundwork for "English for the Children" rhetoric. Specifically, I posit that Unz employed argument from transcendence as a political strategy to reconcile competing demands wrought by these conditions. Finally, I demonstrate that the public dialogue which resulted from this transcendent rhetoric has profoundly impacted the social representations of minority languages and, as a corollary, has shaped the identities of linguistic minorities themselves.