A Republican lawmaker may introduce legislation again next year to do away with mandatory English immersion for students who are non-native speakers.

Similar legislation has been introduced by Democrats and Republicans several times over the years and gotten bipartisan support, only to die at some point in the process.

Arizona law requires that non-native English speakers spend two hours a day separated from their English-speaking peers in full English immersion. Voters approved Proposition 203 in 2000 with the hope it would push students to learn English more quickly, but statistics show the program is not successful.

Sen. T.J. Shope, R-Coolidge, said he may sponsor a resolution to give voters the opportunity to roll back the law next session. Since voters approved the law, it would have to go to the ballot box to repeal it.

In 2021, Rep. John Fillmore, R-Apache Junction, and Shope both introduced resolutions to do away with the law, also known as English Language Learners, or ELL. But Shope’s measure passed the Senate and died in the House and Fillmore’s measure passed through the House and died in the Senate. Both resolutions had overwhelming support. Only one of the 60 House members voted against Fillmore’s legislation.

School groups also banded together to support the measure including, the Arizona School Boards Association, Great Leaders Strong Schools, Arizona Department of Education, Save Our Schools Arizona, the Arizona Education Association and All in Education.

This year, Sen. Martín Quezada, D-Glendale, and Rep. Diego Espinoza, D-Tolleson, introduced ELL reform resolutions, but they went nowhere.

“I think Republicans know as well that educating Latino kids and Latino people is good not only for them, but for the rest of our economy,” Quezada said. He views the 2000 measure as an anti-immigrant policy, noting that most non-English speaking Arizonans are Latino.

“This was done at the height of the anti-immigrant movement here in Arizona. We’ve got Republican legislators and policymakers at all levels of government who have been very hostile to the Latino community,” Quezada said.

Arizona students test low compared to other states and English language learners have especially low graduation rates. Quezada said the ELL policy, which was modeled on a California program, is somewhat unique to Arizona. As a school board member and a senator, he said he speaks with other legislators and educators across the country who don’t have similar laws in place.

Quezada and Espinoza are considered to be on the far-left spectrum of Arizona state politics, whereas Fillmore dwells on the far-right. Shope is a moderate Republican who occasionally collaborates across the aisle.

Next year, Shope said he will consider trying the resolution again. Fillmore lost his re-election bid and won’t have the opportunity.

“It’s just not top of mind for me I guess, so it’s something I’d have to be reminded of. I agree that we ought to go ahead and change things just like John,” Shope said on August 16. “If it can unite the Fillmore and Shope wings of the caucus, why not?”

Shope was initially prodded into supporting the bill by progressive Creosote Partners lobbyist Gaelle Esposito.

Esposito said they were pushing the bill on behalf of UnidosUS, a nationwide Latino civil rights nonprofit.

“Arizona just as consistently failed these students and it’s because we’re segregating them from their native English-speaking peers and locking them in a room for hours at a time and preventing them access from the research-based, evidence-based teaching methods that will help them learn English,” Esposito said.

The ELL repeal legislation came closest to passing in 2019 when Fillmore first introduced it. It passed through the House and through the Senate committee of the whole, but never passed the hurdle of the Senate floor.

In 2019, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 1014 from Sen. Paul Boyer, R-Glendale, which amended the amount of time that non-native English speakers must be separated from their peers, getting it down from four hours to two, but Quezada says that’s not enough. The only thing that will satisfy him – and many other Democrats – is a full repeal of the law.