mr. pillpel, you seem to feel we should have more -- this is a disproportionate number. is that what you're saying? >> if i can respond, david pillpel. it was just to increase the total number from five to six and select two committees from the $10,000 to $50,50,000 pool o that proportionality is maintained, not to select a lot more. i think the countervailing argument is that those committees that raise and spend over $100,000 tend to have professional assistance and tend to be more in compliance and those at lower thresholds, although they're doing less activity, often have more problems that are uncovered. so it cuts both ways. all i was suggesting was rough proportionality. thanks. >> and while we're discussing these, let me just share my thoughts. i came into this conversation concerned even about doing five, but i -- because i think the staff has been under a lot of pressure, has had a back log in vacancies and we don't want -- i'd rather not pile things on them that can only take place well down the road or that risk burdening them further. so i was even going to a