It is only an indication if you assume that these were good amendments. In my opinion, they weren't. See my prior post above. And that really isn't my point anyway. I object to the results being used as the sole basis for labeling a congressmember a big spender.
Understood but we differ on what 'good' means here. Going to my other point, if it _exposes_, then I think it's 'good'. And also, my point was only that and not a reflection on how Flake's action were used by others against Hunter, whom I respect.