Legislative Compromises
The Unz initiative, essentially barring bilingual instruction, has just been passed by the voters in State X. It is scheduled to go into effect in February 2003. A majority of the legislature, however, is hostile to the initiative, believing it to be a product of ignorance and backlash against the increasing number of immigrants moving into the state.
Unlike the situation in California, the Unz initiative in X is not part of the Constitution, and like any other law can be repealed or amended by the legislature. The legislature would like to do something to moderate or eviscerate the initiative. However, legislation depends on the people who voted overwhelmingly for the initiative to return them to the legislature. They thus must walk a fine line.
Provide a memo (5 pages max) to a key legislator who is dancing on this hot skillet, suggesting ways that the legislature might protect bilingual education as much as possible while satisfying the voters that their concerns are being met. Voters seemed to resonate to articulated concerns that the program was educationally unsuccessful in teaching English as represented by low exit rates. There is also a strong suspicion that voters felt the need to "get back" at immigrants who seem to be getting "too much too fast". Consider actual limits on bilingual law, as well as ways to justify to the public that its will (in passing Unz) is being honored.
Resources:
Crawford, Ch. 12-13
James Crawford's Language Policy Website