Remove the Lacey Act amendments from the America COMPETES Act

As your constituent I implore you to stop the Lacey Act amendments found in the America COMPLETES Act (Section 71102, on pages 1661-1665)). Please realize that the Lacey Act amendments found within the America COMPETES Act are illogical and open the path to inflict more harm as they have immense potential for abuse Not only would these amendments be devastating to businesses of all sizes (which is counter to the purpose of the COMPLETES Act), but they would negatively impact the fiscal health and quality of life for millions of citizens and the places they call home. Interstate travel prohibitions would restrict veterinary care, educational programs, & citizen relocations the latter would be disproportionately felt by military service members as they are often relocated multiple times during a pet's lifetime. Animal rescue, rehabilitation & conservation would be highly limited in their work that serves local & regional ecosystems. The federal and appellate courts have already decided that a ban on interstate transportation with injurious species is not based on the original intent of Congress, but a gradual overreach by the federal agency- upholding that banning interstate transportation is overreaching and that only the localities, or states, with legitimate range matches should consider regulations regarding these species. States' borders are already secure from injurious and invasive species as those states have the authority to regulate them and continues to take measures regarding such species. Since the climate varies so greatly across the U.S., which species needing to be addressed should be decided at the state level instead of the federal level- the latter would require considering the entirety of the U.S. as a singular climate zone. Regulating injurious and invasive species is important and must continue, but the proposed method in the Lacey Amendment is not an optimal solution that does not take into account prior issues with broadly applied bans. Reforms to the injurious listing process, inclusive of requiring proof of injurious impact that is based in sound, peer-reviewed science would be better and the role of localities with regards to the regulation of wildlife within their borders should be preserved as they are best positioned to assess local threats and balance the costs and benefits that would result in prohibiting a species. Passing these amendments would completely undermine state wildlife agencies. I ask that you actively champion their removal.