Okay.
Now that you've mentioned the Basel Convention, let's look at that, because I think that's where the technicality lies. I don't think anybody's going to disagree with the spirit of your bill. I think we're all there, but we also have to recognize that on the issue of plastic waste and the need to take action, a key reason we didn't support this legislation is that it's legally mute.
You mentioned the Basel Convention. The prior and informed consent provisions of the Basel Convention—which went into effect this year—would apply to all Basel signatories. The amended agreement, relating to the export of plastic with the United States, would govern the cross-boundary shipments of plastic waste, so why would the bill still be required when we're already a signatory and when we're already following the amendments and the provisions of that agreement, which 188 countries have signed?