By Joan Kimball
Many of us have been paying attention to candidates who will be on our ballot on November 8, more than to the ballot questions. I wanted to bring Ballot Question 4 to your attention. I am writing in favor of a “yes” vote on Question 4.
What: A “yes” vote on Question 4 would uphold the recently passed law known as the Work and Family Mobility Act, which:
- Allows qualified Massachusetts residents, regardless of immigration status, to apply for a standard driver’s license
- Requires residents wanting a license to provide proof of identity
- Requires immigrants to show two documents proving their date of birth and identity, like an unexpired foreign passport, consular identification document or certified copy of a birth certificate (they would not be able to get a REAL ID)
A “yes” would uphold the current law to allow immigrants to obtain licenses, while a “no” vote would reject the new law.
Why: To ensure that all drivers are tested and licensed.
- The law would ensure that all families and workers can drive safely and lawfully to work, school and health care appointments. Just like everyone else, immigrants have to go to the doctor, driver their children to school, travel to work, go to the grocery stores
What a yes vote does not do:
- It does not change immigration status
- It does not confer the right to vote
Secretary of State Bill Galvin has said that the RMV is already skilled at determining who should have a license to drive but not register to vote, from minors and green card holders to TPS visa holders. There are also severe penalties for illegal voting, including jail time and deportation. Other states (including our neighbors Connecticut and Vermont) that grant drivers’ licenses to immigrants have not had issues with illegal voting.
Other states — Similar laws in other states such as Connecticut, Vermont and California and 17 other states and regions (the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) have resulted in fewer uninsured drivers and reduced hit and run crashes. Implementation of the laws have been straightforward.
Who supports Question 4 (partial list includes those who supported passing the Work and Family Mobility Act) — Maura Healey, Conservation Law Foundation, Boston Foundation, Concord Indivisible, Episcopal City Mission, Greater Boston Interfaith Services, ACLU, American Friends, Catholic Charities, Unitarian Universalists Mass. Action, Jewish Alliance for Law and Society
As the Boston Globe concluded in its October 16 editorial: If everyone on the road is tested and insured, doesn’t that benefit all of us?
Joan Kimball is co-chair of the Lincoln Democratic Town Committee, which has supported the Work and Family Mobility Law and Question 4.
“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.
I fully agree. Republicans and Democrats agree the country needs immigration reform, but they can’t agree on any specific improvement so the national policy is locked decades out of date. Until that gets sorted out we should treat people who actually live and work and support our community like people instead of making political scapegoats out of them.