you know it's actually even narrower than information on consumer of the statute and this word information that shows up in the preemption clause isn't a clause of self unqualified and i'm going to figure out where you're getting your qualifiers from ok pl war or not i'm sorry i understand their position and i understand with the district court and i think the district court in this is now speaking only for myself i was wrong to say that only consumer reports can be regulated i'm coming out of from the other side that says information is an awfully broad term so how much is preempted as regulating the exchange of information with non affiliates with outsiders but i never got a quotation from you on the specific provision of the statute and the so confines its operation well i  point me to a specific part of the statu the sort of a banking development here sort of a banking specific development and that is the opening up to banks of allowing them to tell insurance and securities a whole lot of other things that they were always prohibited from from selling so we don't really expanded the kinds of affiliates that banks the banks can have well why isn't the preemption provisions year more of a banking provision that is one vote per text that that that bank affiliate relationship and the congress have which congress has preempted the states from regulating the sharing of any kind of information between a bank and its affiliates in order to protect this whole new range of banking and not just simply a consumer provision did say that the marketing our mission would be considered to be a requirement or a prohibition on still yet sharing and fair for the states are preempted from in acting any restrictions on the use intermission of change from affiliates but that is only you yes you one does not in any way regulate use it regulates only sharing only disclosures consequently the were already working and so congress was going to allow those to be grandfathered in the same thing happened with respect to the vermont credit reporting statute in one thousand nine hundred six congress in one thousand nine hundred when it preempted the states i will i am in conclusion i would like to say that the three hundred position in the way that makes in the context of that statute should not be read to preempt state regulation of affiliate sharing in all contexts by any any person covering all kinds of information including medical information thank you in sixteen eighty one tb two they specifically did not use the term consumer report that is because information shared among affiliates is expressed leak excluded from the definition of a consumer report in six hundred eighty one  let me tell you exactly what my concern is and i think you're going to have trouble with it but if you don't i want to hear why because here here's where i come out most of this case seems to me answered to me in  and the exclusion of certain information using the word information from the definition of consumer report and it seems to me and i guess i'm reinforcing that question i think i mean it's really obvious thing aspects of consumer report and you've got another preemption clause for information i respectfully disagree ok tell me why this is a this right start from what i mean and i think that's the point i was trying to make your honor and hopefully i can make it more systemically that would be that the information was excluded from the definition therefore it would not make sense in fact it would be in can groom for congress to use the term consumer report in sixty nine hundred ninety two perhaps they could have said information that would be a consumer report but for the exclusion it sixteen eighty one a unfortunately we don't have that here they've already excluded it from the definition therefore it does not make sense that they would say restrictions or prohibitions relating to the sharing of the consumer report it's not a consumer report because it's excluded from the definition therefore it makes clear to the states that they were not to treat information shared among affiliates as a consumer report also why does the term and sixteen eighty one the use of the word information on qualified include information sixteen eighty one they might be a consumer report or that might also be qualified information or the term information as qualified for the qualified and excluded from the definition of you know of consumer report numbers we have we have two categories of things one is one is that we have something called a consumer report and we have certain classes of information that are excluded from that definition that would otherwise fall within the definition of consumer reports those are goes include that that that that experience information  experience information which airs to the congress used the term information and then qualified it's very specifically by the time you get back to sixteen eighty one t humpers use the word the word information without qualifying it which  that it covers a broad category of things including experience and not experience information and consumer reports so why don't we why don't we just get take converses word and use that and have the preemption clause include all kinds of information because to do so would give an intent and purpose to the statutory scheme not intended by congress and would exceed the scope and breadth of the fair credit reporting act in general this needs to be read and would have to be why would we have to be limited to the had intended that they certainly could have amended the congressional findings and statement of purpose bound it six hundred eighty one any of the fair credit reporting act to say not only do we intend to regulate information sharing that constitutes consumer reports and credit reporting but now we a tension regulate affiliate sharing among financial institutions congress didn't do that the legislative history the language of the statute and all of the amendments read together indicate that it is limited in its breadth and scope and the intent ninety six in fact the statute does regulate information sharing of knowledge consumer reports i respectfully disagree with that your honor what in the world is sixteen eighty one to doing if not regulating wherein be a place of the requirement upon financial institutions to disclose to their customers their practices and policies with regard to information sharing among affiliates i know that i'm very close to being out of time in all contexts is not why we're here today we're here today to decide one thing and one thing only and that's whether s b one is preempted and all these other important and interesting questions really can be left for another day it's important also to correct a small mistake on her part when i know the fact act did expand did expand the preemption clause by making it clear that limitations on the use of information were preempted that was that was new they also made the act permanent it would have it would have something on january one of two thousand and four are changes in the law well now i'm not sure i agree with your characterization yes in two thousand and three there are certain restrictions placed upon use in the regulation changes but that doesn't necessarily change the scope of what's preempted in terms of what the state may do well i within the meaning of that preemption clause that was that was a broadening my point is my point is this the these comments of the legislatures on the fact that we're not gratuitous observations by subsequent congress about an earlier congress action these were an understanding of congress as it was changing the law i think i'd like to end on this note i don't think any of your honors were on the panel that granted the motion to expedite that we filed then we got an expedited briefing schedule and very much appreciate the expedited argument we've received today but for all the reasons that were cited in that motion and i could go into that if you'd like me to we ask this court to promptly reserve reverse the district court and declare that has to be one is preempted if they go for the questions i'll stand down ok thank you thank you very much