Open Letter to the Texas Senate Transportation and Homeland Security Committee
Content
July 15, 2011 The Honorable Tommy Williams Chair of the Senate Transportation and Homeland Security Committee P.O. Box 12068 Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 Re:
Language Access for LEPs (Limited English Proficient) Individuals at Senate Committee Hearings
Dear Senator Williams : As a director of NAJIT, the most recognized association in the U.S. for judiciary interpreters, I am taking the opportunity of the events that transpired on June 16, 2011 at your committees hearing on SB9, to bring certain facts to your attention. On that occasion, Senator Chris Harris told Mr. Antolin Aguirre, a witness who was testifying through a volunteer interpreter, that it was insulting that he speak in Spanish instead of addressing the committee in English because he had been in this country for many years. If the Texas legislature receives any federal funding, it may be worthwhile to note that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. (Title VI), and the Omnibus Crime control and Safe Street Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 3789(c) (Safe Streets Act), both prohibit national origin discrimination by recipients of federal financial assistance. assistance. Title VI and Safe Streets Act regulations further prohibit recipients from administering programs in a manner that has the effect of subjecting subjecting individuals to discrimination based based on their national origin. See 28 C.F.R. §§ 42.104(b)(2), 42.203(e). The proceedings on June 16 in Texas may have been in contravention of these regulations because reliable language access was not granted to a LEP individual. Whereas there is a telephone number where one can call to request interpreter services published in the Texas Senate Accessibility Page, I personally called after the fact and spoke to the Senate Coordinator on staff who handles those calls. He told me that they never receive requests for spoken language interpreters and only occasionally for American Sign Language Interpreters. I further asked the coordinator what the procedure was to hire spoken language interpreters. He told me he did not know and that I should contact the Senate Secretary, Patsy Spaws, who would be better able to answer those questions. I called Ms. Spaws weeks ago and left a message message explaining the reason for my call. My call has never been been
returned and apparently the person who handles scheduling calls is not aware of the process to follow. It was not just a matter that a certified interpreter was not provided on this occasion when there was a near certainty that one would be needed because of the nature of the proceedings. It went beyond that, when a volunteer offered his services to interpret and went on to provide them without any verification of his credentials. There was no attempt on behalf of the Committee to ascertain whether the person who volunteered his services was qualified to do so. A superficial questioning would have brought to light the fact that this was the first time Mr. Loren Campos ever interpreted anything more complicated than a simple conversation. He has received no training to be an interpreter and therefore did not possess the necessary skills to do the job professionally as required by the circumstances. He is a well-intentioned bilingual college student who did not realize the ramifications that his interpretation could have had, had the testimony continued at length and he were either at a loss for words or omitted something from lack of experience. Not to mention the fact that he did not follow proper form and answered questions asked of the witness directly instead of interpreting the questions to Mr. Aguirre. All of these issues can significantly affect the work product of the committee and waste the valuable time of the members and of the constituents that attend public hearings. There are several certified interpreters in the Austin area that are available to provide services in these settings. It is only a matter of apprising the staff that handles these logistics of what resources are available. We trust that you will take this information into account in assessing how the Senate will handle future hearings that require interpreting services and offer our services to assist in whatever way we can.
Sincerely yours,
Maria Cristina de la Vega Director, NAJIT
Language Access for LEPs (Limited English Proficient) Individuals at Senate Committee Hearings
Dear Senator Williams : As a director of NAJIT, the most recognized association in the U.S. for judiciary interpreters, I am taking the opportunity of the events that transpired on June 16, 2011 at your committees hearing on SB9, to bring certain facts to your attention. On that occasion, Senator Chris Harris told Mr. Antolin Aguirre, a witness who was testifying through a volunteer interpreter, that it was insulting that he speak in Spanish instead of addressing the committee in English because he had been in this country for many years. If the Texas legislature receives any federal funding, it may be worthwhile to note that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. (Title VI), and the Omnibus Crime control and Safe Street Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 3789(c) (Safe Streets Act), both prohibit national origin discrimination by recipients of federal financial assistance. assistance. Title VI and Safe Streets Act regulations further prohibit recipients from administering programs in a manner that has the effect of subjecting subjecting individuals to discrimination based based on their national origin. See 28 C.F.R. §§ 42.104(b)(2), 42.203(e). The proceedings on June 16 in Texas may have been in contravention of these regulations because reliable language access was not granted to a LEP individual. Whereas there is a telephone number where one can call to request interpreter services published in the Texas Senate Accessibility Page, I personally called after the fact and spoke to the Senate Coordinator on staff who handles those calls. He told me that they never receive requests for spoken language interpreters and only occasionally for American Sign Language Interpreters. I further asked the coordinator what the procedure was to hire spoken language interpreters. He told me he did not know and that I should contact the Senate Secretary, Patsy Spaws, who would be better able to answer those questions. I called Ms. Spaws weeks ago and left a message message explaining the reason for my call. My call has never been been
returned and apparently the person who handles scheduling calls is not aware of the process to follow. It was not just a matter that a certified interpreter was not provided on this occasion when there was a near certainty that one would be needed because of the nature of the proceedings. It went beyond that, when a volunteer offered his services to interpret and went on to provide them without any verification of his credentials. There was no attempt on behalf of the Committee to ascertain whether the person who volunteered his services was qualified to do so. A superficial questioning would have brought to light the fact that this was the first time Mr. Loren Campos ever interpreted anything more complicated than a simple conversation. He has received no training to be an interpreter and therefore did not possess the necessary skills to do the job professionally as required by the circumstances. He is a well-intentioned bilingual college student who did not realize the ramifications that his interpretation could have had, had the testimony continued at length and he were either at a loss for words or omitted something from lack of experience. Not to mention the fact that he did not follow proper form and answered questions asked of the witness directly instead of interpreting the questions to Mr. Aguirre. All of these issues can significantly affect the work product of the committee and waste the valuable time of the members and of the constituents that attend public hearings. There are several certified interpreters in the Austin area that are available to provide services in these settings. It is only a matter of apprising the staff that handles these logistics of what resources are available. We trust that you will take this information into account in assessing how the Senate will handle future hearings that require interpreting services and offer our services to assist in whatever way we can.
Sincerely yours,
Maria Cristina de la Vega Director, NAJIT
