Vermont Bans the Bomb

In town meetings, citizens take a stand against nuclear arms

On the first Tuesday in March, Vermont citizens convene in their towns, pretty much as New Englanders have done for three centuries, to govern themselves. These town meetings are exemplars of grass-roots democracy, but they rarely deal with issues of national, much less international, significance. This year was different. On agendas throughout the state, tucked between routine budget matters and garbage-dump disputes, was a motion calling for a moratorium on the spread of nuclear weapons. In all but 31 of the 192 towns voting, the motion was approved. "The people of Vermont," said Patrick Leahy, their Democratic Senator, "are way ahead of the Congress and the Administration on this issue."

In fact, nudging Washington was the point of the vote. With an almost quaint, civics-class formality, the antinuclear proposition called on the state legislature to pass a resolution directing Vermont's three-man congressional delegation to urge President Reagan to propose a mutual nuclear arms freeze with the Soviet Union. On Friday in the Vermont state legislature, the house passed the resolution, 103 to 26. Similar measures have been approved by six other states, and town meetings in Maine and New Hampshire are about to address the issue. In the Senate this week, Democrat Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Republican Mark Hatfield of Oregon plan to introduce a resolution closely resembling the one adopted in Vermont.

David McCauley, a Quaker activist from Putney, Vt., organized the successful campaign in his state. "We needed ways for people to act locally," McCauley says. 'The town meeting format is just that."

In Newfane (pop. 1,129), 20 hilly miles from Putney in southern Vermont, the proceedings got under way promptly at 9 a.m. The local grange hall has a fitting Puritan homeliness, all hard-edged monotones except for the American flag near the dais. By 11:45 a.m. 17 of the 22 "articles" on the "warrant" had been discussed and voted on. Municipal officials won 500-an-hour raises. A local rescue squad was granted a $2,291 subsidy.

Moderator Frederick Houston, a local lawyer, announced that one more article, placed on the warrant by petition of 5% of Newfane voters, would be deliberated before the lunchtime recess. "It won't take long," said Houston, who then quickly read through item 18, which urged "a mutual freeze on the testing, production and deployment of nuclear weapons, and of missiles and new aircraft designed primarily to deliver nuclear weapons, with verification safeguards satisfactory to both countries."

A congenial dissenter, Roy Brooks, rose to speak. "Being against this," said the retired Army colonel, "is like being opposed to motherhood and apple pie. But it is pretty silly for us to be advising the country on foreign policy." Brooks was no longer smiling. "Those people who are pushing for it are the same people who argued for unilateral disarmament. They want us to roll over on our backs like a defeated dog and say everything will go on happily ever after." Bernard Friedelson, a businessman, was anything but defeatist in his rebuttal. Said he: "To reverse the trend toward nuclear warfare is a voyage of a million miles. Like all voyages, it starts with a single step. This town meeting is the place to take that first step."

By noon the debate was over. Each of 124 Newfaners wrote yes or no on a paper slip and filed up to a pair of white wooden ballot boxes. Soon Houston announced, "94 for and 30 against," to a solid wave of applause.

Gerald Ebbesen, 72, a World War II veteran, voted for the nuclear weapons ban. "There's been a lot of saber rattling lately," said Ebbesen, adjusting his hunter's cap to leave. "I'm as American as the next, but it's good to know this town ha enough common sense to push ahead a measure like this." The White House, let alone the Kremlin, is far removed from Newfane, but not, Vermont's citizens insisted last week, beyond reach.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.