I think these are good ideas, but I wonder if they are related to this piece of legislation. Our witnesses said earlier that they'd like to see these changes made before this bill is adopted. It seems to me these are good changes that would equalize the system, but they are outside the scope of the bill that is meant to deal with the problem that unsecured loans form a way around the spending limit law.
I don't want to put those words in your mouth, but do you agree with me or accept that what I'm saying is legitimate?