The Mailer They Sent — To Democrats Only
The same group that bypassed Town Meeting with 35 signatures is now mass-mailing voters. We’ve seen the card. Two things stand out immediately.
It Was Sent to Registered Democrats Only
As best we can tell, the “Committee to Support Equal Protection” mailer was distributed only to registered Democrats in Yarmouth. If this question were genuinely about the United States Constitution and equal protection — rights that already apply to every Yarmouth resident regardless of party — the mailing list would not be partisan.
A targeted Democrat-only mail drop is the receipt: this is a partisan political operation, not a constitutional concern. It has no place on a Town ballot decided by all Yarmouth voters of every party and no party.
The Front of the Mailer
The Back of the Mailer — Read It Twice
Read What They Actually Wrote
“We all know that immigrant families have provided essential labor that cares for our elderly, tends to our sick, landscapes our gardens, plows our roads, cooks our food, delivers our meals, builds our homes and keeps our economy running.”
That is the imagery and the wording they chose — pairing a vintage cranberry-harvest postcard with copy that reduces immigrants to a list of services they perform for us. Cares for our elderly. Tends to our sick. Plows our roads. Cooks our food. That framing is not respect. It is the framing of a labor class that exists to serve. Read it twice and ask whether this is how the people who claim to speak for immigrants actually see them.
No Distinction Between Legal and Illegal
Nowhere in this mailer — front or back — do the authors draw a line between legal immigrants (who came through the process, work, pay taxes, and are part of the community) and illegal immigrants (who entered or remained in violation of federal law). Every legal protection they claim to invoke already applies to legal residents. They will not acknowledge the difference because the difference would defeat their argument: this question exists to extend protections beyond what current law already provides — to people whose presence is not lawful. That is what a yes vote on Question 4 actually signals, regardless of how the mailer is dressed up.