We talked about this a little bit in our written brief, but not in a lot of detail. Now I can draw on a different example, which is securities regulation. I think these amendments are in the right direction. I made comments in the brief that they probably don't go far enough. Part of the reason I think they don't is that you really need to build a base of understanding of what's going on in order to be an effective regulator. We see this in other sectors too. They need to know what's going on and get an understanding.
International finance and capital markets are things that change constantly—all the time—and we're always playing catch-up. They manage. Even with 13 regulators in this country, they manage. I do think that imposing disclosure obligations or having an audit function are important, but I would make it mandatory and I would make it standard, which is to say not ad hoc and dependent on having some inkling of what's going on. In fact, we learn things because we find them out. That's what continuous disclosure in securities regulation is about. It's making sure that we're constantly on top of things.
So I think it's in the right direction, but it could be strengthened.