As noted, right now, what determines whether or not an investment moves from section 25.1 to 25.2 is the information that's developed and the analysis that's provided by the national security agencies. This amendment would automatically make the determination that the information warranted a section 25.2, as opposed to allowing information to make the determination.
The only consideration I would raise for the committee is that this amendment speaks to any jurisdiction, and there are politically motivated prosecutions and, in a limited number of cases, convictions on the basis of corruption. This would be extending to a firm a mandatory section 25.2, which is not the same as the mandatory national security review, which would allow the national security agencies to determine whether or not we move from section 25.1 to 25.2 to 25.3.