i thank the gentleman for that information . 
there has been some suggestion , i understand , however , that although the bill may be in the same shape now , that there is a manager 's amendment proposed and that the vote on the manager 's amendment , which we presume , we have not seen it , would cover a multitude of subjects that are in the bill ; that the vote on the issue that i have raised could be made on that manager 's amendment . 
therefore , you would have to vote against the manager 's amendment if it changes the provision to which i referred . 
i would hope , and this is not a question , just an expression , that the majority would make in order an amendment so that we could have a debate on that issue if in fact the manager 's amendment does what we are concerned about and some people are proposing undermining the ability of some groups , faith-based groups . 
that is why the catholic conference is so concerned about it , faith-based groups or other groups who would build affordable housing , get money under the bill and then be precluded from participating in any efforts , not partisan efforts but nonpartisan efforts to get people on the rolls . 
i would just urge the gentleman , who is a distinguished member of the rules committee , to consider , very hopefully , favorably the request of ranking member frank to have made in order an amendment to deal with that subject . 
i thank the gentleman for yielding . 
