I like a good use of language as much as the next guy but it appears the thesaurus bot was active at the Times and Transcript was stuck on "go" when this editorial was written:

...But this is precisely what Stephen Harper expects of his Tory cohort, which now holds a slight majority in the Red Chamber, when he introduces two bills this summer to impose term limits on senators and provide the legal apparatus for individual provinces to elect their own members to this august body. Reform is in the air, and the prime minister is determined to rewrite the gospel, which currently (and, most agree, infamously) sanctifies the practice of handing out lifetime appointments to government loyalists only too happy to serve their country for $135,000 a year, give or take. To his credit, Mr. Harper sings with the celestial choir on this issue. And, barring an unforeseen revolt by angry septuagenarians determined to hold onto their fat stipends, he will prevail. Far less certain, however, is the degree to which his reforms will actually democratize representation in this country...

Is that just me? Maybe it's appropriate for the subject matter, the rarely used and fairly useless ripe upper chamber. I think it's a good point. Harper expect people to be blander and better than they are. They aren't. No one is as blandy and goodie-two shoes-y as he. Fortunately, the Provinces are against Senate Reform or don't care and the limitations of the Federal level actively promoted by a succession of Prime Ministers will come back to bite. How many people really want Senate reform, are really kept up at night by the thought of it? That's an answer under the Jeopardy category "Few".