BRATTLEBORO-In listing the dozen voter groups who, for various reasons, cannot or will not participate in an open Town Meeting, Thomas Franks (Representative Town Meeting member, District 9), argues against himself in advocating for the Australian ballot.
If all these voter groups so predictably fall victim to circumstances that prevent or preclude their participation, removing the informed guidance the RTM model provides its constituents would seem to distance voters further from achieving the informed consent that is desirable on matters of good governance.
Removing the accountability of elected town representatives and expecting the voters to inform themselves well enough on the issues to responsibly cast their vote is unlikely, in my view.
In place of RTM, the Australian ballot will do ... what? Allow unelected, unaccountable interest groups to influence the most suggestible voters in a direction not debated in public.
The RTM is a wise tradition, and if we’re the only Vermont town using it? Well, wear it as a badge of honor: “The One and Only Brattleboro!”
Jay Jacobowitz
Brattleboro
This letter to the editor was submitted to The Commons.
This piece, published in print in the Voices section or as a column in the news sections, represents the opinion of the writer. In the newspaper and on this website, we strive to ensure that opinions are based on fair expression of established fact. In the spirit of transparency and accountability, The Commons is reviewing and developing more precise policies about editing of opinions and our role and our responsibility and standards in fact-checking our own work and the contributions to the newspaper. In the meantime, we heartily encourage civil and productive responses at voices@commonsnews.org.