The scandal at Enron had been particularly bad because the company's auditing firm, Arthur Anderson, ignored accounting improprieties in Enron's books in order to keep Enron as a business consulting client. To address this sort of problem, Republicans in the House proposed a bill that would establish an auditing oversight board that would set rules for the industry. The bill also directed this oversight board to ban any firm from simultaneously providing business consulting and auditing services to the same company. Progressives and Democrats in general felt this legislation did not go far enough. LaFalce (D-NY) proposed a substitute version that would have established a public regulator to oversee audits, banned financial analysts from owning stock in the companies they covered, established a number of new restrictions on companies and the firms that audit them, and imposed tougher penalties for violations. When offered, this substitute was voted down. Undeterred, LaFalce offered essentially the same language again, this time in the form of a motion to recommit (send back) the bill to its committee with instructions that the language be added. Progressives supported this motion as they had supported the original substitute, but their position faired to better this time. The motion to recommit was rejected, 205-222.