It’s the dawn of a new century, but does Bill Sizemore know which one?

James Crawford has his doubts.

Crawford spoke at Oregon State University on Saturday night to participants in the Linguistic Association of the Southwest’s 37th annual national convention.

He said Sizemore might be more comfortable in 1908. That was when a wave of resentment started building toward German-speaking immigrants.

World War I brought anti-German hostility to a boiling point, Crawford said. Laws were passed banning the speaking of German in public places, including classrooms.

Crawford, the president of the Institute for Language and Education Policy in Maryland, sees grim parallels with Oregon’s upcoming election. Sizemore habitually spearheads ballot measures. This year, his targets include bilingual education.

He argues teaching students with limited English skills in their own languages discourages them from learning the country’s dominant language. It also devalues the English language, he says — inching America closer to a bilingual society.

Sizemore’s first argument is ridiculous, Crawford said. “All research shows that Hispanic immigrants are learning English more rapidly than other immigrant groups,” he said.

Although Sizemore’s arguments are old, said Crawford, the measure itself is radical and unprecedented.

Measure 58 seeks more than elimination of bilingual education in Oregon, he said. It sets specific time limits on how long students can receive any help with language barriers. The limit is a year for kindergarteners through fourth-graders, a year and a half for fifth- through eighth-graders and two years for students through high school.

“This is such a radical concept that it hasn’t been proposed in any other state,” Crawford said.

He said there’s something new — and disturbing — about the current movement against bilingual education. “It’s no accident that the main supporters of these measures are anti-immigrant groups,” he said.

Crawford said these are the same people who want to make English the “official” language of the United States. That’s new. “There’s never been a movement to make English the official language,” he said.

“This is more than a difference over how kids learn language. It’s not about the language. It’s about the language speakers.”

Lawmakers in California, Massachusetts and Arizona have curtailed bilingual education but without strict timelines. Enough flexibility exists to give students the help they need, Crawford said.

Crawford said Sizemore will probably end up defending his measure in court. He’s been there before. In 2000, Sizemore successfully led the passage of Measure 7, requiring state government to reimburse landowners when regulations reduce the value of their property.

It took two more incarnations of the measure before Sizemore found one that passed legal muster.

This time, said Crawford, Sizemore will find himself flying in the face of Lau vs. Nichols, a 1974 U.S. Supreme Court case. Justice ruled unanimously that schools have a legal responsibility to help students with limited English skills.

Bilingual education already faces serious threats, Crawford said. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, students are required to take high-stakes tests in English. As a result, he said, students are pushed prematurely into English-only classrooms.

Then again, Crawford said, No Child Left Behind is about to be left behind itself. “Congress has gotten the message that the law is pretty unpopular.”

Measure 58 poses the biggest danger, Crawford said, representing an alarming shift in how people view immigrants. Especially in Oregon.

Oregon has been a national leader in bilingual education, Crawford said. Oregon Senate Joint Resolution 16, passed in 1989, recognizes the need to promote diverse language for all students.

Now all that is in jeopardy, Crawford said. “Oregon is ground zero in terms of restrictive language policies,” he said. “This is a very serious situation you’re in.”

Both presidential candidates support bilingual education. “We should have every child speaking more than one language,” said Barack Obama. John McCain said Americans should avoid assaults on each other’s heritage and language. “Do we want a policy of language restrictionism?” he asked.

Unfortunately, said Crawford, McCain posed the question in 1988 when he was a much more passionate and outspoken opponent of anti-immigrant groups. Crawford remembers meeting with McCain. “It was clear these groups really ticked him off,” he said.

McCain has since softened his rhetoric against anti-immigrant forces, Crawford said.

“Perhaps he needs to approach Jose the plumber to take a serious look at this issue.”