This is why I argued earlier on that Senate reform is urgent and important and that it's why we may have to go through a constitutional amendment procedure for the Senate, because that procedure involves wide consultation. That's the whole point of the requirements in the constitutional amendment process, that when you're dealing with something that is a fundamental value in our political system, it requires that breadth of consultation and involvement.
I'm not a defender of the status quo, for the reasons that Richard has already stated. As a comparative scholar of federal systems, I've come to the conclusion that there are many things in which there are lessons we can teach other federations. But one area where in comparative terms we are weakest is in the form of our federal second chamber. Not that it hasn't done some good things, but in terms of its function in creating a cohesive federal system, it is not performing that function. And that's not the fault of the individual senators; it's the form of the structure that was set up. So that's what we have to deal with.
That's why I think this is fundamental, important, and urgent.