Carolyn McCarthy

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the reason that we are doing this motion is because, and I am glad we have this conversation today and the debate going back and forth because it reminds me of the debate that we had on June 19 when we were talking about only the amendments that we are trying to get passed. I think people have to stop, think, and hopefully actually read what the amendment says. There is nothing in the amendment on trying to close the gun show loophole that will affect someone's Second Amendment rights. We have to make that extremely clear. Right now, if someone wants to buy a gun, when they go to a gun store, they have a federally licensed dealer. When they go to a gun show, 45 percent of those selling guns there are federally licensed dealers. All we are saying is that those that come into gun shows and are not federally licensed should not be able to sell a gun to someone because the criminals know where to go get the guns; that is the problem. The criminals do know where to go get the guns. So all we are saying is if someone is going to sell a gun at a gun show, that person should have to go under the same rules and regulations as those legal dealers at the gun show. That is all we are saying. As was mentioned, 95 percent of the people that go to gun shows get their guns instantly through the check. We are dealing with a very, very small percentage, very, very small percentage of people that might have to wait a couple of hours. Then we even go further to a smaller percentage that actually might have to wait 24 hours. This is what I am saying: How can I stand here and not fight to do whatever I can to make sure that guns do not get in the wrong hands? How can I stand here and make sure that what we do here in the House will be the right thing? Because if we pass a bill and that bill is not strong enough to stop the criminal from getting the gun, and then God forbid someone buys a gun at a gun show, goes to one of our schools, goes to one of our churches, goes to one of our synagogues and does their killing, how can we live with each other? How can we even face the victims of those crimes? That is what we have to do. I am someone that actually supports the Second Amendment. I happen to believe in the Second Amendment, and I have to tell my colleagues I know of an awful lot of gun owners that are coming up to me more and more and more, even saying, and actually they are very proud when they come up to me and say, Mrs. McCarthy, I am an NRA member, and I do believe that I have a right to own a gun. But I also believe that we have to take a little more responsibility for our guns. All we are asking for our citizens and for everybody that wants to buy a gun: Are you willing to take 3 business days, 3 business days, to make sure that a criminal or a child does not get their hand on a gun? The majority of Americans are saying yes to that. Unfortunately, that sound has not gotten in here, inside of Washington. We have to have good standards. That is why we are all here. We set the laws of the land, and we are certainly going to have disagreements, and I understand that. The majority of us know that we always have to compromise, and we accept that also. But there comes a point when that compromise could cause a lot of loss of lives, and we have to be very clear on that, very, very clear on that. Mr. Speaker, I hope between now and when the bill comes up for a vote again that the clear information will be out there. As my colleagues know, there is a part in the amendment where they talk about tracing. They do not like the idea of tracing. Mr. Speaker, I have to tell my colleagues every successful police department throughout this country that really works with the ATF on tracing, they are the ones that have the lowest crime rates because they are able to find those illegal gun dealers. Traces are an extremely important part of the bill. We cannot let that go. Mr. Speaker, we do need more funding for that so that the Boston project that has worked so wonderfully, has cut down murders in Boston, especially among the young people; it is a project that works, and we are seeing it work throughout the country. We are supposed to support those things. That is tracing. Here it was brought up earlier that gun shows do not really have guns go to criminals. Well, we have a report, and I offer this which includes the letters from police organizations that support the original bills, as they were, and I want to submit this, the ATF report, so this can go into the Record so people can look at this when they want more information. The materials referred to are as follows: Police Foundation, Washington, DC, September 16, 1999. Hon. Orrin G. Hatch, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Hatch: The Police Foundation is a private, independent, nonpartisan, and nonprofit organization dedicated to supporting innovation and improvement in policing. Established in 1970, the foundation has conducted seminal research in police behavior, policy, and procedure, and works to transfer to local agencies the best new information about practices for dealing effectively with a wide range of important police operational and administrative concerns. On behalf of the Police Foundation, I am writing today in strong support of the gun-related provisions adopted by the Senate as part of S. 254. These measures are crucial in reducing access to guns by children and criminals. As you and other conferees meet, the Police Foundation urges you to focus on an issue of importance to law enforcement--the need for at least three business days to conduct background checks at gun shows. This is the same period of time currently required when a firearm is purchased from a licensed gun dealer. We believe it is critical to have at least three business days to do a thorough background check, especially to access records that may not be available on the Federal National Instant Check Background System (NICS), such as a person's history of mental illness, domestic violence, or recent arrests. For law enforcement officials, it is not how fast a background check can be done but rather how thorough the check is conducted. Without a minimum of three business days, the risk increases that guns will be sold to criminals or others prohibited from purchasing guns. The Police Foundation is concerned that neither the 24-hour or 72-hour requirements allow for an adequate background check. The FBI has analyzed NICS background check data for the last six months and estimates that if the law had required all background checks to be completed in 72 hours, 9,000 people found to be disqualified would have been able to obtain a weapon. If there had been a 24-hour background check time limit, 17,000 prohibited purchasers would have obtained weapons in the last six months. The FBI also found that a gun buyer who could not be cleared by NICS in under two hours was twenty times more likely to be a prohibited purchaser. We strongly believe that all gun sales--be they in gun stores or at gun shows--should be subject to a three- business-day background check requirement; without such standards, gun shows will continue to be a major source of weapons for violent felons, straw purchasers, the dangerously unstable, and others who threaten our communities. Despite being convicted of multiple felonies, Hank Earl Carr was able to purchase multiple guns at gun shows--guns he used to murder his stepson and three police officers in Florida in 1998. The Police Foundation supports other Senate-passed provisions, including requiring child safety locks with every handgun sold; banning all violent juveniles from buying guns when they turn eighteen; banning juvenile possession of assault weapons; enhancing penalties for transferring a firearm to a juvenile; and banning the importation of high capacity ammunition magazines. In order to protect the safety of our families and our communities, it is important to adopt the Senate-passed, gun- related provisions. The Police Foundation is committed to working with you and your colleagues in the Congress in supporting and enacting sensible measures to protect all Americans and most especially our children. Sincerely yours, Hubert Williams.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 7 of rule XXII, I give notice of my intent to offer a motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 1501 tomorrow. The form of the motion is as follows: Mrs. McCarthy of New York moves that the managers on the part of the House at the conferees on the disagreeing votes on the two Houses on the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 1501, be instructed to insist that, one, the committee of the conferees should this week have its first substantive meeting to offer amendments and motions, including gun safety amendments and motions; and, two, the committee of conference should meet every weekday in public session until the committee of conference agrees to recommended a substitute.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to instruct the conferees on the Juvenile Justice Reform Act. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) and I offer this motion to help move the conference committee forward towards approval of effective juvenile justice legislation that will help save children's lives. I will skip part of my written testimony mainly because of what I have already heard tonight. I think what is important to realize is why did we even start this journey. It all had to do with the shooting at Columbine. We know the gun that was used in that particular shooting was bought at a gun show. No questions asked. That is why we are dealing with the gun show loophole. That is why we are here. That is what the American people want us to do. Our job here is to listen to the American people. Our job here is certainly not to be on an emotional fever but certainly to say we are listening and we are trying to work something out. But I have to say, people in this chamber seem to think that we might be able to get through some sort of a gun show amendment that is not going to close the loopholes. The American people are watching this. Being somewhat of a newer Member, I have a great deal of faith in the American people now knowing when there is a good bill and there is a bad bill, and they will judge us on that. And I think that is the important thing to remember. Tomorrow, on the steps of this Capitol, the beginning of the yearlong procedure as far as a million women, mothers, grandmothers will be starting so they can be here next Mother's Day. They are going to be the ones that are going across this country saying that we have to do something. I say to all of us, let us work together, let us put a good bill through, and let us not have the NRA write something up knowing that they do not want anything done. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to instruct the Conferees on the Juvenile Justice Reform Act. The Gentlewoman from California and I offer this motion to help move the Conference Committee forward, toward approval of effective Juvenile Justice legislation that will help save children's lives. The motion is simple and straightforward. It contains a 3-part instruction: (1.) The Juvenile Justice legislation should include a loophole-free system that assures that no criminals or other prohibited purchasers obtain firearms from gun shows; (2.) The Juvenile Justice bill should not include provisions that weaken current gun safety law; (3.) The Juvenile Justice legislation should include provisions that aid in enforcement of current laws. I urge all of my colleagues to support the motion to instruct. I believe it is fundamentally important that the House overwhelmingly support this balanced motion because the American people are looking to Congress for leadership. The American people want Congress to help make our school's safer. If we are going to make our schools safer, we have to address the issue of easy access to guns. In every one of the tragic school shootings over the last two years, it was too simple for children to get a hold of guns. In Littleton, Colorado, Eric Harris was able to purchase a TEC-9 used in the Columbine High School shooting no questions asked at a gun show. The motion to instruct includes a provision requesting that the conferees close the deadly gun show loophole. The motion to instruct also includes a provision that states we must NOT weaken current gun law. Before Members vote on the motion, I think it is important that we remember why we are having the debate over juvenile justice. As my colleagues know, legislation regarding juvenile justice stalled last year. And the Juvenile Justice bill was moving slowly this year until the shooting at Columbine High School caused the American people to stand-up and say that Congress must do something about kids and guns. It would be a total disaster if Congress responds to the recent outbreak of school shootings by approving a Juvenile Justice bill that actually weakens our current gun safety laws. I would warn my colleagues that the American people will not be fooled by a juvenile justice bill that responds to the deaths in our schools with NRA- drafted proposals that do not truly address the problem of children's access to firearms. We are fighting for children's lives here. Congress must approve a bill that truly protects our kids by keeping guns out of the hands of juveniles and criminals. I urge my colleagues to support the motion to instruct and show the American people that Congress is listening to their concerns.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the inspiring matriarch of an American family. Amalia Distenfeld, Born in Lvov, Poland, in August 1919, came to this country in 1947, to start a new life. She and her husband, the late Dr. Menachem Distenfeld, were among a handful of survivors of two very extensive and well-known families that perished in the Holocaust. Amalia is living testimony to her own courage and the possibilities of the American dream. Hard work, coupled with purpose, optimism and an unfailing dedication to family allowed her to see children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren thrive in this country of freedom. She has dedicated her life to promoting educational and moral values that have helped guide and sustain her family. The same tenacity that allowed Amalia and Menachem to survive the nightmare of the Holocaust enabled this young couple to surmount the struggle of a new beginning in New York, devoid of resources, in a strange environment with three children. Amalia took in boarders, cooked and cleaned for them, while her husband learned the language of their new country, then studied and reestablished himself as a physician. Her strength, her faith in God and her refusal to be crushed by the past, allowed for a quick integration into American life. Amalia worked with Menachem in their Queens, New York, office to establish a medical practice whose hallmark was selfless public service to the community at large, including a great many fellow survivors. Unfortunately, just as life's promises were being realized, she was left a young widow. Without her beloved Menachem, Amalia natural exuberance and steadfast commitment to family has sustained her over the last 33 years. She took on new challenges and new careers of public service, first in the American Heart Association and then the American Lung Association, where she worked well into her late seventies. Perhaps Amalia's greatest joy is derived from the achievements of her children and grandchildren in areas of education, technology, law, medicine, and business. She cherishes her time with them as they do with her. Mr. Speaker, Amalia is a living lesson of courage, hope and optimism to all who know her. Her children's fidelity to Amalia's religious legacy and their appreciation for America's blessings were learned at her knee. I ask my colleagues in the United States Congress to join me in wishing Amalia Distenfeld good health and happiness on the occasion of her 80th birthday, with many wonderful and blessed years to come.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise to stand with the gentleman from Michigan and to express my support for improving the National Instant Check System. Just this week the State of Colorado announced its intention to return to a State-based instant check system because of a deadly mistake that occurred under the Federal instant check system. In June, Simon Gonzalez, who should have been prevented from buying a firearm, was able to buy a gun. After buying the gun, he used it to kill his three sleeping children. It is clear that we need a better instant check system. Do not get me wrong. The National Instant Check System has been an important tool in keeping guns out of the hands of felons. Since November last year, when the system was started, 50,000 prohibited persons have been stopped from purchasing firearms. But we can do better. I look forward to working with the gentleman from Michigan to ensure that our instant check system is improved. In particular, we will be watching to ensure that States and the FBI increase their cooperation and bring the National Instant Check System up to speed.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, the Tax Bill presented on the House Floor today is extreme. It ignores the overwhelming need for Congress to address debt reduction and protect the long term health of Social Security and Medicare. Furthermore, this irresponsible tax proposal jeopardizes important priorities of mine, such as health care for our nation's veterans. I believe the overwhelming majority of this Congress wants to support a balanced and responsible tax cut. I know that my constituents on Long Island need tax relief. But the bill before us simply goes too far. The bill before us has been drafted to score political points. In order to demonstrate their support for a huge tax cut, the House leadership has sacrificed responsible economic policy. Several Members of the majority party have expressed their opposition to this irresponsible tax break because the huge cuts have been based on unproven estimates about the so-called budget surplus 15 years from now. The average American citizen certainly understands that using such projections is dangerous and irresponsible. Rather than trying to score political points, I believe we should be debating a tax cut that will meet the priorities of the majority of this Congress. Let's enact a more reasonable tax cut that will allow us to protect Social Security and Medicare, as well as improve healthcare for our veterans. Mr. Speaker, I will support tax cuts to help Long Island's families, businesses, seniors and veterans. However, the tax cuts contained in H.R. 2488 are dangerous and irresponsible and could jeopardize the economic security of my constituents. Therefore, I urge members to oppose H.R. 2488 and support more responsible and reasonable tax policy.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, a lot of people do not understand the damage that large capacity clips can do. I know firsthand the damage they can do. On the Long Island Railroad, Colin Ferguson had large capacity clips. Many people said it would not have made any difference. It would not have made a difference to the people that were killed in the front of the train, but at the end of the train where the clips were finally taken away from him, we might have been able to save some young people at the end of the train. That is what large capacity clips do. I beg the Speaker to bring it forward again so we can get going on this. We saw so many young people here today in Washington, bright young people, people I think that are smarter than us here in Congress. If you listen to them, they are the ones that were facing the violence in the schools. The other day in my district, we talked about gun violence. Our parents, our children, they are scared. We have to do something. We can do it bipartisanly. We can. We can work together and work something out. The bottom line is we have to keep guns, high capacity clips, away from criminals. And we certainly have to make sure guns do not get into the hands of children. That is all we are asking. Nothing more, nothing less. I think if we all sit down together and work together, we can do this.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to and wish a very happy birthday to a great New Yorker and wonderful American, Jack Rudin. Jack Rudin has served for many years on the boards of many of New York's prominent cultural, education and social service organizations. He is a current member of the executive committee and board of overseers and managers of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; an honorary trustee of the American Museum of Natural History and of the Congregation Shearith Israel, the Spanish and Portugese Synagogue; vice chairman of Jazz at Lincoln Center and director of the Hebrew Free Loan Society and the George C. Marshall Foundation. In addition, Mr. Rudin is a trustee emeritus of Iona College, where the Rudins established the Roberta C. Rudin Program in Judeo-Christian Studies. As the original sponsor of the New York City Marathon, he is also the chairman of that event. As a veteran of World War II, he was awarded the Combat Infantryman's Badge and the Bronze Star for his courage and patriotism. He also holds awards from many organizations, including the Greater New York Councils of the Boy Scouts of America, Jewish Theological Seminary for America, the Jewish Foundation for Christian Rescuers/ADL, Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of New York, Conservancy for Historic Battery Park, and the Congregation of Christian Brothers. Mr. Rudin has received honorary degrees from Iona College, City College, City University of New York and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Jack Rudin has been a great friend to Long Island. On behalf of Long Island, Happy Birthday, Jack!

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), the ranking member.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Talent) who is the chairman of the Committee on Small Business and I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), the ranking member. I think this is something that can show that our committee works very well together, certainly for our veterans but also for our small businesses. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of an important piece of legislation that ensures our veterans the resources and access to capital needed to start or expand a small business. As a cosponsor of this legislation, I believe the Veterans Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development Act of 1999 remedies many of the inequities veterans face when looking for small business assistance. Thousands of brave men and women have fought for our country and the freedoms we cherish. Unfortunately when they return to civilian life, veterans encounter numerous barriers when they are attempting to start up or expand their businesses. This can range from a lack of training to difficulty securing adequate capital. H.R. 1568 helps these men and women become entrepreneurs and embrace the American dream for which they fought so hard to preserve. It is apparent that small businesses have become the backbone of our economy and continue to provide invaluable services. Currently, out of a total business population of 23.2 million, 5.5 million are owned or operated by veterans. The district I represent on Long Island, New York, is dependent on the success of veteran-owned small businesses. Although a number of programs exist at the Small Business Administration to provide assistance, many are not targeted at veterans. One obvious concern involves the lack of centralized resources from which veterans can obtain information on programs and capital specifically created for them. This legislation would create an Office of Veterans Business Development and an associate administrator within the SBA to promote veteran opportunities. In addition, it calls for the creation of an Advisory Committee on Veterans Business Affairs to serve as an independent source of advice, policy and recommendations to the SBA, the Congress and the President. Lastly, H.R. 1568 also addresses concerns raised by disabled veterans. Currently there are over 104,000 service-disabled veterans in the business community. The Veterans Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development Act establishes a 5 percent subcontracting goal for service disabled veterans. By taking this step, we are ensuring that veterans, especially those injured fighting for their country, have equal opportunity to government contracts. Too often we see our veterans neglected in their time of need. Under this legislation, veterans will receive greater access to capital and training, programs that will allow them to succeed in a market system they fought so hard to protect. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, we have no additional speakers, and if the chairman is prepared, I can go ahead and close? Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We called upon our veterans to endure the hardships of war and being away from home. They serve proudly without question. Many have made a career out of this service, however when we continue downsizing in our military force an influx of servicemen and women are entering civilian life only to encounter a lack of assistance when attempting to start a business for themselves. The Veterans Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development Act provides the resources they need to succeed in their transition to private sector. Their success not only benefits them but also the surrounding community overall economy. As we approach July 4 weekend and reflect upon the liberties that we fought so hard to obtain, we should not forget the men and women who continue to fight to protect these liberties. By passing this legislation, we are providing our veterans with the tools that will allow them to make that dream they fought for a reality. I urge my colleagues to support this bill and help veterans succeed in the business community.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen).

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Phelps). (Mr. PHELPS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, if I had been present on Friday, June 25, 1999 I would have voted in support of H.R. 1802--The Foster Care Independence Act of 1999.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Alfred and Agnes Lawrence from Rockville Centre, Long Island as they celebrated their 50th Wedding Anniversary on May 1, 1999. Their life's journey began in Sheepshead Bay, Brooklyn where they were both born and raised. They met as teenagers and soon became each other's sweetheart. During World War II, Alfred proudly wore his country's uniform and served in the United States Navy as a SEABEE in the South Pacific on Okinawa island. And since Agnes was stateside, she contributed her part to help the war effort. A year after the war, on May 1, 1949, Alfred and Agnes exchanged wedding vows. The Lawrences joined millions of other post-World War II couples by starting a family--seven children. The family Lawrence first lived in Brooklyn but soon moved to Rockville Centre, Long Island to raise their children. Throughout the years, the Lawrences experienced the joys of work, play, education, graduation, and marriage of their children. The happy couple celebrated their Golden Wedding Anniversary at a retirement home in Spring Hill, Florida where Alfred is an active SEABEE veteran and Agnes is a HoneyBee. They are now blessed with twenty-one grandchildren and two great-grandchildren. A long and fruitful journey life has given them. Mr. Speaker, I offer my congratulations and best wishes to Alfred and Agnes Lawrence on their 50th Wedding Anniversary.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, we first need to go back to the American people and ask them to speak to their representatives. We will work with mothers, fathers, advocates, and I won't stop until 13 children don't die every day. I will be at front lines as we figure out every strategy open to us to pass real gun violence legislation. First, we will work with the House and Senate conferees on the Juvenile Justice bill. Secondly, we don't yet have a date when the conference will be appointed. The Senate first decides to appoint their conferees. The next big litmus test for the American public to watch is the Motion to Instruct the Conferees. That motion will consist of the House asking the Conference Committee appointees to keep the Senate language on the Gun Show Loophole Amendment. We will attempt to attach the Gun Show Loophole language to the Treasury Postal bill and Commerce/State/Justice, which both oversee some gun laws. In addition, some of my colleagues have discussed attempting to attach the language to every appropriations bill, including this week's Transportation bill. I still believe that we need freestanding gun legislation. That's why I will continue to ask that my bill--the Children's Gun Violence Prevention Act--be given a hearing. We will work to include the bill-- or pieces of it--in any gun violence legislation.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo). (Ms. ESHOO asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Meek). (Mrs. MEEK of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard). (Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones). (Mrs. JONES of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Napolitano). (Mrs. NAPOLITANO asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson). (Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey). (Ms. WOOLSEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I just want to make a clarification, that my amendment actually has in it that there will be no national registration for guns. It is in the amendment. It would make it a law.