If enacted, House Bill 1147 would make English the only language option for driver’s license examinations. In our related article, state Rep. Chuck Gatschenberger, R-Lake St. Louis, sponsor of the bill, said the legislation targets an issue of public safety. He claims not all signs can be recognized by shape. Although the argument is valid, the proposal is not an effective solution to the problem, assuming there is a large enough problem in the first place.
Presumably, the signs Gatschenberger was referring to are temporary signs that go up in constructions zones or refer to emergency road conditions. The bill aims to prevent accidents caused by non-English speakers being unable to read those signs, but how many times is language discrepancy the real cause of traffic accidents?
Understanding driving conditions is not rocket science, especially when signs such as those previously mentioned are usually accompanied by other visual elements besides text to effectively warn drivers of any danger. Construction zones are coned off, flashing arrows indicate lane closings, traffic collectively slows before approaching risky areas and you don’t have to speak a certain language to realize ice is on the ground. Additionally, standard traffic signs are easily identifiable by color, size and shape.
The Missouri State Highway Patrol has spoken out against this bill, and we like to think the patrol knows what it’s talking about when it comes to traffic-related issues.
The argument that lack of English proficiency leads to traffic accidents is unfounded. A non-English speaking driver, who may be educated and careful, is no more likely to cause car accidents than an English speaking driver, who may be incompetent and careless. There are numerous other factors that cause many more driving-related dangers, such as alcohol, but there is no proposed legislation to entirely ban the product because it would be seen as too severe — just as this bill is too severe to solve a minor problem.
Non-English speakers will drive whether or not they have a license, and if they don’t have a license, they will have neither insurance nor proper driver’s training. Do we really want to increase the amount of untrained, uninsured drivers on the road? Sure, the bill would help immigrants acclimate to the U.S. by forcing them to learn English, but how are people supposed to learn English if they can’t drive to places where the language is taught? With this proposed bill, non-English speakers who need to drive to work won’t be able to, so family livelihoods and businesses will hurt as a result. There is no real tangible benefit to this proposal. At best, it is a political move aimed to please the anti-immigration crowd. It would be far more beneficial for signs to be produced in multiple languages.
Hopefully, as it has in the past, the proposal will die in the Senate. Otherwise, competent citizens who contribute to society will be harmed by a severe law that does little to improve traffic safety.
