peter sprigg is senior fellow for policy studies at the family research council.h groups have worked to lobby gop lawmakers on this issue. pete per sprigg, let me start with you and start were the argument that has been raised by john baner that this will have an adverse business and litigation impact. explain that for us. >> well, whenever you expand the number of protected categories under these type of laws what you're actually doing is giving a license to sue to new groups that didn't have such a license before. it's almost an inevitable result that there will be further litigation, and that will impose costs in terms of time and expense, even in cases where the merits of the case may be relatively weak. so i don't think any republican should be supporting this kind of further intrusion into the practices of private businesses. >> brown: let me ask gregory angelo why he thinks republicans should support this? >> well, first, to refute that argument that this legislation will be a boon to trial lawyers, the g.a.o. came out with a report less than two months ago