In July, I posted the entry BhamBizJournal: "Congressional Inaction Could Derail Recovery".
I have never heard anything in response from the Birmingham Business Journal, the Birmingham Business Alliance, the Business Council of Alabama, or the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
I am a nobody and can live with that, but I can still make pronouncement here and disseminate the same by means of email, Twitter and Facebook.
In the Birmingham Business Journal editorial in question, the Journal said, among other things:
Even the ongoing recovery is threatened by the fierce political divide that has taken hold in our nation....
As has often been the case lately, the primary culprit is Congress . . ..
The petty disputes in Washington must stop. Business leaders need to take an active role by supporting candidates who won't fall into the red vs. blue and Democrat vs. Republican debates.
So, I ask the Business Council of Alabama: What does it think about what the editorial said? What internal discussions has the BCA had about the same? What discussions has the BCA had with Gary Palmer about the same? If the BCA agrees with the editorial, what ideas does it have for improving Congressional performance?
The same questions can be asked of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (which has also endorsed Gary Palmer, but which has a much lesser connection with Alabama and the 6th Congressional district), and of the Birmingham Business Alliance (which has the closest connection to the 6th Congressional district, but I am not aware of any endorsement yet by the BBA).
To my knowledge, Gary Palmer steadfastly refuses to talk about the matter (see Just answer the question, Gary Palmer), and, given that, I have put out that Gary Palmer will be ineffective (see Why Gary Palmer will be ineffective).
Relative to Mark Lester, the reports I see on the Internet are that there is not expected to be any debate between Gary Palmer and Mark Lester.
In my campaign in the 6th Congressional district Republican primary, I contended that questions, answers, and discussion about many important national issues was largely academic because Congress was "broke" or "kaput" and incapable of properly performing its role for the American people in addressing and taking action about such issues. One impediment I said was that reasonable and rational discourse on issues was not possible in the "broke" condition of Congress.
I would carry that view over to the matter of any debate between Gary Palmer and Mark Lester and say that such a debate would be academic and not worth voters' time, with the exception that I think discussion and debate about whether or not Congress is "broke" and what the American people can do to improve the situation, would be of incalculable benefit to the voters in the 6th Congressional district.
I have tried to get a local symposium going before November 4th, but I doubt my efforts will yield that result. (See Extension of Solicitation of Symposium before Nov. 4th.)
Thank you for listening to me on my soapbox.