I certainly appreciate Mr. Chambers' spirit of compromise and have been trying to think how we might split the difference. What I wanted to propose was that we might find our way, if we could, to agreeing unanimously that we change some of the dates that are in the motions here, and if we could agree to those date changes and to pass these motions, we might be able to get on with our study as early as Monday.
You'll see in the subamendment, in item (b)(i), it was proposing a date of May 20, 2022. I would propose that we change that to May 27, and in item (b)(ii), there's a date of May 13 that was referenced earlier by Mr. Albas. I would propose changing that to May 20, and then I don't believe there are any dates in the amendment that was moved by Monsieur Ste-Marie, but in the main motion there are some dates that I think we would need to change in order to make this work.
I propose changing the date in item (b)(i) from May 20, 2022, to May 30, 2022, and the date in item (b)(iii) from May 30, 2022, to June 3, 2022. I respect that it doesn't quite get us to the June 10 date that Mr. Chambers was talking about, but I also think that, given that the Senate will hopefully be ready by June 10 to debate the bill, we might expect that the House would pass the bill out of the House and deliver it to the Senate so that it's ready to go by its June 10 date.
I hope in the spirit of compromise that's been offered up at the table that this might work and allow us to recapture some of the time that's already been lost and still devote ourselves to a thorough study of the bill, leaving enough time to get it to the Senate in time for when they have determined they would like to do their own study.
I'm happy to repeat those dates one more time if folks would like.