I think that reforming the system would be harder, more precarious, and not worth the bother. It would be a lot of fuss and hard to interest reformers in, while

I think that reforming the system would be harder, more precarious, and not worth the bother. It would be a lot of fuss and hard to interest reformers in, while easily arousing lobbying pushback from trolls. There would be continual pressure to compromise the purity of a well tuned working system into something that still has room for the trolls to continue their trolling. And when the spotlight was off it, it would start to slip back towards the way it was, with extension bills being nodded through. Honestly it'd be both simpler to rouse interest for, and simpler to argue for, a total repeal. The squawking would be louder, but the final result would throw the ball back into the troll's court - to sneakily extend something is a lot easier than to re-implement it when it has been scrapped entirely.