My understanding is one ought not to be amending the definition section in a substantive manner, which this does. In effect, it deletes the coverage of the act over concurrent areas of jurisdiction. One ought not to do that unless it is necessitated by an amendment elsewhere in the act.
Furthermore, I question whether this amendment is in order. It seems to me that by removing the application of this bill to areas of concurrent jurisdiction, the amendment is exceeding the scope of the bill, which clearly was directed to us from the House as a bill that would apply to both exclusive and concurrent federal jurisdictions.