Not the personalities, no.
One of the things that I found most interesting, listening to all the remarks, is that there doesn't seem to be anyone endorsing the current piece of legislation as something we need to.... I see heads nodding here.
So would it be fair to say, and correct me if I'm wrong, that we absolutely need to get rid of the current one, and that even if this one does not meet all of your particular interests--be it industry or environmental groups--it is still better to go forward with something akin to this bill and then try again later on if you don't get what you want than to continue to sit there with the $75 million limit? Is it not better to go forward with an imperfect piece of legislation rather than sit with what we currently have?
Am I stretching that one too far, or do I have general consensus on that?