Yes, that's right. If it defined it, instead of having ambiguous groupings.... If it defined it based on occupation-based selection, at least we'd know that that's its intent and that it could only select based on occupations.
However, at that point, I would also like to argue that it would be best to have time for other immigration witnesses to speak about this provision and the benefits and costs of doing that occupation-based selection, rather than having a brief debate in a finance committee on a budget bill.