Dear Town Meeting Members,
Article 43 was not passed by a narrow margin of just 2 votes. It was a missed opportunity to improve our practice of democracy in Lexington. For explanation:
In our town we have a growing population of people from the South Asian subcontinent. Their path to citizenship can be 20 years. Other Asian immigrants have similar waits. Meanwhile the children are born as full citizens. They have never seen their elders vote, even if their own schools are the nearest polling booths.
We all know modeling desired behaviours is one of the most powerful forms of education. I had hoped that with the passage of this article, ballot issues, the quality of municipal candidates and similar town based concerns would become accessible and immediate for all families. And in a reversal of roles, the children could vote and model the right behaviour for their immigrant parents. By 18, they have usually left the town for colleges elsewhere.
For most, being a citizen becomes real when you first vote. There are automatic privileges and a self-worth acquired with that simple act. This can not be achieved by the mere payment of a town's property taxes.
Look around at the volunteers and elected leaders in our committees and boards. Even in the appointed positions most of the people serving are citizens. (Except for my Aussie friend Dan Voss, but he has oodles of Australian charm, and is the exception which proves the rule). For most non-citizens their path to community contribution and leadership tends to stop at cultural events. Stepping into town or school impacting roles, even appointed, usually takes the self worth and confidence of being a citizen. One has then truly 'arrived'.
Would allowing the youth of such families to vote at age 16, change that dynamic? I am not sure. But it adds to the feeling that one belongs and has agency, even if vicariously through the children.
Deepika Sawhney
(Precinct 6)