Sean Duffy: “I just want to clarify that in the proposed rule there is no requirement for a subpoena. That doesn't exist. Now, they…”

“I just want to clarify that in the proposed rule there is no requirement for a subpoena. That doesn't exist. Now, they might have told you that they want to reform that rule, but that is not the way the proposed rule stands today. Again, if our government wants information from the private sector, we all believe they should have a subpoena for it, number one. Again, on the concern of hacking, I wrote the Chair of the CFTC and asked for additional information about how they can preserve and protect this very sensitive information, and, in essence, they said: We can protect it because we say we can protect it. That doesn't give me great confidence. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy). The amendment was agreed to. Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. LaMalfa The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 printed in part B of House Report 115-3. Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: At the end of title III, insert the following: SEC. ___. DETERMINATION OF PREDOMINANT ENGAGEMENT. Section 2(h)(7)(C) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C.…”