(Approved by Steering Committee, 2/7/24)

In June 2021, our local League voted to approve a study to examine two issues relative to voting in Westford (excluding any Massachusetts state or federal voting rights):

1. Should the Westford League of Women Voters develop a position in support of the expansion of the local franchise to permit local voting by 16 and 17-year-old residents of Westford and/or support legislation in the Massachusetts state legislature to allow such an expansion?

2. Should the Westford League of Women Voters develop a position in support of the expansion of the local franchise to permit local voting by non-US Citizen permanent residents of Westford and/or support legislation in the Massachusetts state legislature to allow such an expansion?

The group met six times during 2021-22 to research the subject matter areas, as well as the League’s study process. However, due to other time commitments, the group did not actively meet during 2022-23, and in June, 2023, at the League’s Annual Meeting, the assembled members dissolved the study. This final report officially closes the study effort. Thank you to the following study members for dedicating their time, energy, and curiosity to this study group: Gloria Miller, Lynn Cohen, Cathy Creed, Dina Donahue, Cynthia King, Erika Kohl, Madonna McKenzie, Pat Reppucci, Lisa Ratte, Cathy Ricketson, and Peggy Liu.

The study group would also like to thank two guest speakers: Robin Chen and Jessica Vaughn. Robin Chen, a member of the League of Women Voters of Boston and an advocate for children’s rights, spoke to us about the history of voting rights and arguments in favor of youth voting (while also sharing references to opposing arguments). Jessica Vaughn, Director of Policy Studies for the Center for Immigration Studies, shared the rationale for the link between citizenship and voting rights, described the extensive process for obtaining US citizenship, and explained the myriad of other potential immigration classifications.

This final report summarizes the study’s findings. A League study requires an impartial examination of any issue and full exploration of arguments both for and against the adoption of any potential League position. Therefore, both pro and con arguments are presented in this report with no final resolution or opinion expressed by the study group. Since no consensus was achieved and the voting rights study has been dissolved, the Westford League takes no position on the questions examined and no local League advocacy is authorized on these issues. Individual members, of course, may advocate on these issues as they see fit. 

Youth Voting

While there are numerous versions of youth voting initiatives, the most common one would allow 16 and 17 year olds to vote in local elections, and this limited expansion of the franchise was the focus of the study’s research and discussion.

Arguments in favor included: (1) a long-term increase in civic engagement stemming from making voting a habit and an increased relevance to civics education; (2) successful implementation of youth voting in local elections in other localities, including several towns in Maryland; (3) successful implementation of youth voting initiatives in over a dozen other countries; (4) ongoing efforts in support of local youth voting initiatives in California, Illinois, Colorado, and Maine; and (5) support for local youth voting in other Massachusetts’ towns [however, these efforts have been stalled out at the state legislature]. Advocates also cited positive trends and examples of youth civic engagement indicating that young people are highly motivated and ready to participate more fully in our democratic process through voting.

Concerns voiced by study members included: (1) adolescents’ ongoing brain development which could correlate with decision making based on emotions or impulsivity; (2) adolescents’ ongoing brain development which could correlate with a susceptibility to undue influence; (3) exposing minors to political speech from campaigns which could undermine legal protections against the potential exploitation of adolescents; (4) exposing minors to political speech from campaigns which could undermine parental  authority to supervise communications with their minor child; and (5) decreasing the voting age would effectively lead to a lower age of legal majority, thereby undermining the protective commitments to minors enshrined in current family and child welfare law. It was also discussed that any change to the local franchise would involve a complex legislative process and limited resources might be better focused elsewhere.

No consensus was achieved within the study group, but anyone who would like to learn more may wish to click here to review this League study from Maine.

Permanent Resident, Non-Citizen Voting

While there are a variety of similar initiatives, the most common one would allow permanent resident, non-US citizens to vote in local elections, and this limited expansion of the franchise was the focus of the study’s research and discussion. 

Arguments in favor included: (1) non-citizens may pay taxes, own businesses and homes, and send their children to public schools, yet are unable to vote on issues impacting themselves and their families; (2) allowing permanent resident, non-citizens to vote in local elections would encourage increased civic engagement and upholds the longstanding principal of “no taxation without representation”; (3) non-citizen voting is consistent with the history of expanding the franchise, including removing barriers to voting based on race or gender; (4) successful implementation of non-citizen voting in local elections in other localities, including several towns in Maryland; (5) ongoing efforts in support of local non-citizen voting initiatives for other municipalities in California and New York; and (6) support for local non-citizen voting in other Massachusetts’ towns [however, these efforts have been stalled out at the state legislature]. Advocates also cited the need to recognize that non-citizens are a vital part of our local communities and that structural impediments to obtaining federal citizenship (which can often take over a decade or more) should not prevent their full participation in local democracy.

Concerns voiced by study members included: (1) the right to vote at any level of government should belong exclusively to US citizens; (2) expanding voting rights to non-citizens could disincentivize permanent residents from seeking US citizenship; (3) by not completing the extensive citizenship process, non-residents would not have demonstrated an understanding of the English language or the fundamentals of American government; (4) non-residents are nationals of their country of origin and would not have to taken an oath of allegiance to the United States; (5) given the complexities of the federal immigration system, this could lead to difficulties in implementation of non-resident local voting, including the potential for voter fraud; and (6) the study group was unable to obtain reliable information on the number of permanent residents who could be impacted by the suggested expansion or how such a change could be implemented at the local level. It was also discussed that any change to the local franchise would involve a complex legislative process and limited resources might be better focused elsewhere, for example, on addressing the need to improve the immigration process and promoting an improved path to citizenship.

No consensus was achieved within the study group, but anyone who would like to learn more may wish to click here to review this League study from Boulder, Colorado.

Final Summary

Although the group was unable to achieve consensus on either issue, study members gained new knowledge about the League’s study process and both of these evolving areas of local voting rights. Ongoing initiatives in the Massachusetts state legislature and elsewhere in the country will be interesting to track. If there is sufficient need or interest to revive either of these study questions in the future, the group’s research has been archived. Any questions about the dissolved study or this final report should be directed to Gloria Miller, info@lwv.westford.org  

To reiterate, the Westford League takes no position on the questions examined and no local League advocacy is authorized on these issues. Individual members, of course, may advocate on these issues as they see fit.

LINKS (for reference only)…

https://www.lwvme.org/VotingAgeStudy

https://www.lwvbc.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=629866&module_id=395947