As your lone state government reporter here in Charleston, I have to cover both the House of Delegates and state Senate at the same time. Sometimes this means going to one chamber or the other. Sometimes that means having two computers open when two different committees are meeting at the same time.

This also means I must prioritize the bills and resolutions I write about. I very rarely write about bills and resolutions that are not taken up by committees in the House and Senate. I joke that I’m the tyrannosaurus rex from Jurassic Park: I respond to movement. Because I do not have the hours in the day to write about every bill or resolution introduced by a lawmaker that gets someone upset.

There is almost always one bill or resolution that never has a chance of being taken up, yet it gets all the attention. Del. Chris Anders, R-Berkeley, introduced House Concurrent Resolution 33, to recognize Spruce Knob — West Virginia’s highest point — as “Trump Mountain” in honor of President Donald Trump.

The resolution specifically proposes that the U.S. Board on Geographic Names consider the renaming of Spruce Knob “five years after the passing of President Donald J. Trump.” The resolution is largely symbolic.

First, an explainer: House and Senate resolutions — or in this case, concurrent resolutions that must be adopted by both the House and Senate — do not have the same weight of law that the passage of Senate or House bills have. Resolutions merely express a desire of the House, Senate, or Legislature as a whole. Point being, if HCR 33 were adopted, it would NOT change the name of Spruce Knob to Trump Mountain.

HCR 33 had 11 co-sponsors when it was introduced Friday on Valentine’s Day, though several lawmakers have removed themselves as co-sponsors since last week because of negative attention. Other news organizations — mostly TV news stations — filed several stories about the proposed name change, resulting in a groundswell of reactions, mostly against.

Now, I’ve been around long enough to know HCR 33 was never going to be put before the whole House of Delegates for consideration. Instead of being referred to one of the House’s new standing committees, it was referred to the House Rules Committee.

This committee consists of the House Speaker, Majority Leader, and leaders of the House’s standing committees, along with the leadership of the House Democratic caucus. It’s also the committee that decides what bills and resolutions go before the full House or remain parked.

Even then, I’m not seeing much explanation by the TV news outlets that HCR 33 doesn’t rename anything, doesn’t have the weight of law, and is merely a request. Yet, it would certainly seem from the reaction that West Virginians — even Trump supporters — do not want to see Spruce Knob renamed.

Some ask why some lawmakers would waste time on this. Well, sure, but how much time do you really think it took the lead sponsor to have the bill drafting office spit this concurrent resolution out? I doubt it took more than 15-30 minutes. Don’t they have more important things to do? Sure, but lawmakers can walk and chew bubblegum at the same time.

In short, focusing on this concurrent resolution is a waste of everyone’s time. I hate that I’m even writing about it now. It’s clickbait. Then again, I think it’s rich for some state Republican Party leaders to criticize the “legacy media” for drawing attention to HCR 33. It is a public document introduced by a paid lawmaker, supported by other paid lawmakers, that utilized taxpayer-funded resources to draft.

Heck, the poor taxpayer-funded communications director of the House now has to field phone calls and emails trying to do damage control caused by the introduction of this concurrent resolution that never had legs to begin with. And while HCR 33 is probably not the only thing Del. Anders is working on, there will now be a perception that this was more of a priority for Anders than real, pressing issues that should be garnering the delegate’s attention.

HCR 33 is not the only piece of legislation getting people fired up. Another bill would eliminate the use of “woke” words by state departments and agencies. This is a conservative state run previously by a Democratic-turned- Republican governor and friend of Trump. How many state agencies under his prior leadership do you really think used the word “womxn,” or “chestfeeding” in government documents or websites?

On one hand, lawmakers should not introduce bills and resolutions simply to virtue signal or if they have no intention of them being taken up by a committee or the body as a whole. On the other hand, I do think we in the media need to be more discerning and not cover the mere introduction of bills or resolutions for the sake of getting reactions and clicks, especially if we know those bills and resolutions have no real chance of being taken up.

But also, I do think people need to be more selective about the bills and resolutions that get them outraged. There seems to be people out there in the business of “sustained outrage.” It happened with the right during the Biden years and it’s happening again with the left during the Trump years. I think it’s way more productive to be selective about what to be outraged by versus living in perpetual outrage.

Because while you’re focusing on a bill or resolution that has no chance of passage, you’re likely not paying as much attention to the bills and resolutions that are being debated and voted on.