As for the mechanism of what the two bills are doing, they're very similar. The concept is definitely a lot different, but the mechanism for how both are going to be achieved is very similar, right? With regard to interoperability, it's driving innovation. It's driving competition going forward. The right to repair bill is more so about a product that's already in existence and about making sure that people have the choice to repair where they need to.
I'm going to focus on my bill in a sense, though, when we look at our rural communities and at what this means to all the small towns all across this country that have these small manufacturing shops in existence. It might be a town of 200 people, but that shop might employ half the town, and because it employs half the town, the benefits to the rest of the community are there, because you have people buying groceries in the grocery store.
In Frontier, the town I grew up in, there were 300 people, but we had two independent grocery stores. The Co-op had just a gas station. That was it. Now, in lots of places, the Co-op is your grocery store, your gas station and your lumberyard. It's everything.
In Frontier, because we have a company like Honey Bee in existence and had Friggstad Manufacturing prior to that, it allowed private industry to grow and to thrive. For a lot of our small towns, it's fantastic that we have the Co-op to keep things going, but these other companies do exist. Other private industries do succeed and do thrive. That's what we want to focus on with this bill, because it helps to preserve those companies and those businesses that exist in the small towns and also incentivizes new ones to open up. Hopefully, they'll do so. If they're going to be in a city, great, but if they want to be out in a small town somewhere, where they can have the room to operate, yes, there's a need for them in the small towns too. Hopefully, this will keep the ones that are there but also incentivize more to want to join the market.