If these individuals are exceptions and the rest are competent, then there should be minimal impact beyond creating a side show. As a tiny minority, they wouldn't have any real sway in the bill construction within their party, especially if it has any chance of passing. The split between the parties is usually narrow, so the representatives with the most potential to influence passing legislation are the ones near the center margins as they may vote against party lines and provide a bigger base of support. The reps near the outside margins tend to have less influence. Even if they sway some stuff during the creation of the bill, it's stuff that likely has to get ripped out to find enough support to pass into a law.

But if things are passing by only 1 or 2 votes anyways, where anyone 1 persons vote is a major deciding factor, that's an indication of a bigger issue. Such a divide means that half the country feels they are getting screwed and there was little compromise to include their concerns.

    > If these individuals are exceptions and the rest are competent

I've got news for you, then!

If they're the average, then why call them out as specific examples?

Not exactly. The house of representatives should be much much larger than it is.

The same thing with the senate too. Current senate setup gives a lot of power to empty land.

"Current senate setup gives a lot of power to empty land."

That's the entire premise that got the smaller colonies to sign on. It's a feature, not a bug.

I mean, owning slaves was a feature at one time. Features change with time.

How do you think that would work out? I would guess the less populated states would leave if they feel disregarded. I mean, that lack of representation was the basis for the revolution.