Public service or political promotion?

Editor: I received a piece of mail from our City of Lodi. According to the mailer, it was “provided as a public service by the City of Lodi.”

What a load of crap. Our city council and our city manager should be ashamed of this.

This “public service” is nothing more that an election promotion for the pension/sales tax that will be on our ballot in November. I know that it is nothing more than an election promotion mailer because it was addressed not just to me and my wife but also to the only other registered voter in our household.

How much did it cost to send this mailer? How much are we paying a consultant to put these mailers together? I don’t think it is legal to promote election matters with public funds so they hide it as a “public service.”

As for the pension tax, don’t be fooled by the “possible ballot question” that is listed in the "public service” announcement. This is a tax to pay for pensions. If you don’t want to believe me, that’s fine. Perhaps you will believe the honorable City Council member JoAnne Mounce. Speaking about the pension/sales tax, here is what Mounce said on June 20 at the city council meeting.

“The cause of this point blank is CalPERS and our pension fund, and I have spent at least two years of my life fighting with CalPERS.”

I urge you to take a stand against the unsustainable and bloated pension system. In November, vote no on the pension/sales tax measure. JOHN E. JOHNSON Lodi

Spheres of Influence and Immigration

Editor: Immigration and the Fourth of July should beg the question: “What does the United States stand for in the present?”

While both major political parties ramp up arguments for why the present topics of immigration are critical, I’ve forced myself to take a step back to ask a different question: “What about Monroe and Roosevelt?”

In 1823 President Monroe attempted to assert the infant United States as a global power. He told the European powers of the day that much of the Western Hemisphere was to be under the guardianship of the U.S. This meant that global powers were not to assert themselves in the business of American colonies and countries.

History has shown when U.S. interests are compromised the Monroe Doctrine is invoked. For example, the 1865 intervention in Mexico to remove a French installed government. Roosevelt’s corollary to Monroe in Central America and the Caribbean from 1904-1915, policing debt collection of nations from European lenders. Kennedy and the Soviet Union in Cuba. This brief history illustrates the point: when the United States issued the doctrine, the country was accepting responsibility over the hemisphere.

Do we still want this responsibility to the hemisphere? If not, let’s keep from complaining when “outside nations” want to get involved for economical or other reasons. If so, let’s consider what the implications are for today. We would have a responsibility to come to the aid of our neighbors when they need help. That may not mean open borders, but it does mean leadership and empathy. We would have to recognize how our stability should be a light to those in need.

We have recently spent trillions in the name of national security, and many supporters would argue it is going to a good cause. What about political, economical, and environmental instability of our region? Though symptoms are important to recognize (i.e. border crossings), the root problems are much more complex than what we do with immigrants when they enter into our country. Partisanship has wrongfully convinced us that, while supporting “our side,” we are having the most important conversation. JONATHAN SOLIS Lodi

Poetic uplifting

Editor: Most of President Trump's decisions make me very sad, so I cheer myself up with this classic truth.

Humpty Trumpty sat on his wall. Humpty Trumpty took a great fall. And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put Trumpty together again. ANNETTE DOUTHITT Woodbridge