I guess my logic here is that this is a way we can move forward and still salvage the report with credibility. This allows us to move forward on this topic. I think we can give comfort to the folks in the organic sector that we are not going to ignore this issue, that we're actually going to address it in the study, which I think we've been doing already. As I said before, there is no seed variety in the registration process at this time. It does give us the time to do a proper and thorough study of the process for the approval of a new variety. It also allows us to hear all the sides of the story, which I think is very important.
It's always dangerous when we start playing politics with stuff like this because of the unintended consequences that can come from it. This is one way to diffuse the issue, move it forward, and actually do a good report. If we don't do this, what we're actually going to do is tell our witnesses who come forward on the report from now forward that we already have our minds made up on how we're going to move on this report. If I were a witness, I would ask why I would bother coming to testify to the committee in that situation.
This is one way to maintain the integrity of the report. It doesn't undermine it; it allows the committee to move forward on a report in a positive manner, and it still addresses the concerns that Mr. Easter has validly brought forward and that the organic sector in alfalfa has brought forward. We're not leaving anything to chance. We're not taking anything out. We're just doing it in a proper process and order.