It’s obvious at any ATM, usually on the Internet or on common household products on which directions for use are provided. Have you noticed there’s at least one other language — and sometimes two — besides English spoken around here? There has always been at least one other language other than English spoken around here. We’ve just become much more aware of it in recent years because of another surge of immigrants.

America has always had a significant population of immigrants, and that’s part of what makes it so unique.

It’s always been diverse, and that’s what makes it interesting. America represents freedom from all forms of oppression, which is why thousands of immigrants were attracted to this country at the beginning of the 20th century.

America represents freedom to disagree in a democratic society and freedom to earn one’s own living.

But what about the freedom to maintain a cultural identity different from American customs and traditions? What about the freedom to continue speaking a mother tongue, in addition to English? In a land of unlimited opportunity, read the fine print. What? You’re still learning to read English? Oh well. You lose.

During the mid 1980s, U.S. English and English First were formed for the purpose of advocating English as the only acceptable language of communication in the public, private, business and educational settings.

Proponents of English-only argue that it will foster stronger patriotism, a more “unified” nation and an elevated sense of civic responsibility.

This seemingly sincere attitude is smoke and mirrors for a political agenda that will essentially ignore the needs of the blossoming immigrant population.

During the last decade, 26 state governments have designated English as their official language. Iowa is not among them at this point, but it’s not for lack of trying. Our state legislature’s most recent effort was made two years ago.

At first glance, it does seem reasonable. Lawmakers support English-only because they think it will save taxpayers money by eliminating the necessity for extra resources to print two languages. A Des Moines Register poll indicated that 81 percent of Iowans favored the measure.

But Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack refused to support that bill until additional funding for teaching English as a second language was added. To accommodate Vilsack, a companion bill was added to provide $1.4 million for English as a second language classes in the 2003-04 school year.

The campaign’s real agenda is to foster a growing attitude of anti-immigration sentiment. James Crawford, an independent writer and lecturer, formerly the Washington editor of “Education Week,” a publication that focuses on the politics of language, has been speaking out against English-only since 1985. According to Crawford, the language restriction movement did stem directly from an immigration restriction movement, which also just happens to appeal to Klu Klux Klan sympathizers and other supporters of white supremacy.

Proponents of English-only have somehow been misled to believe that minority groups are resistant to learning English and that minority children will acquire the second language quickly and more easily through immersion. This “gun-to-the-head” approach will therefore “encourage” immigrants to conform as quickly as possible.

Are they aware of the staggering amount of research in second language acquisition? Research has consistently shown the academic benefits of bilingual instruction. When minority students fail, it’s because of too little instruction in their native language — not because they haven’t learned enough English.

Researchers have also maintained that the consequences of losing a mother tongue for language minority children are often extensive and severe. In homes where parents do not communicate with children in the mother tongue, family communications may deteriorate.

Reality can no longer be ignored. Neither can the irony. Today’s anti-bilingual current is a mainstream phenomenon. In a land celebrated for its freedom, liberty and justice for all, those who come seeking that freedom continue to be alienated and ostracized for someone else’s selfish gain.

Language does not function as a symbolic identifier in America. Our founders were aiming for an ideological brand of nationalism that valued agreement on democratic principles rather than bonds of ethnicity.