I analyze two bills from the state legislatures of California (SB 1174) and Arizona (SB 1242) that propose to expand bilingual education where English-only education was previously the default. Using a critical discourse analysis lens to conduct a directed content analysis, I ask who bilingual education is for, why it is offered, and how the proposed programs would affect the education of English learners. The theoretical framework draws heavily from interest convergence theory, which holds that minoritized communities make civil rights gains when their interests converge with interests of the majority/state. Additionally, the framework employs the idea of economic preparation through education as a hegemonic force, driving the expansion of dual language programs. The bills demonstrate the shifting discourse from supporting English learners to an economic interest in bilingualism. The Arizona bill restricts bilingual education to students who already speak English fluently, making the programs unavailable to English learners. The California bill explicitly makes the potential programs available to all students, including English learners. The bills mention multiple reasons for expanding bilingual education, but the primary emphases are economic benefits and national security. While the promotion of bilingualism is a step forward, interest convergence theory and hegemony are useful analytical tools to understand the change and ensure that all students have equitable access to language programs.