I would like to play the history that I go to in a moment against this chart. It is entitled Average Employment 1976 to 1986.

[The chart follows:]

Senator ANDREWS. We are not talking from 1976, Mr. Chairman. Mr. TAYLOR. I think it is important, Mr. Chairman, for this committee to realize that this Commission, particularly from the period of 1981 to the present time. has taken cuts in excess of 55 percent. And I don't think there is another agency in this town

Senator ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, let me point out that it was 1980 that the Congress passed deregulation. The Commission's responsibilities a decade ago were totally different than they are today.

Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman, the fact of the matter is that, despite the fact that we have deregulation, we still have trucking regulation to do. We probably have more bus work than we have ever had before.

ANTI-DEFICIENCY ACT

Senator CHILES. Mr. Chairman, what you are doing now is presenting the kind of arguments that come before the committee before we decide on an appropriation. And all of that would be very relevant if you were speaking to us about next year's appropriation or if you had been doing it timely about last year's appropriation.

We are now talking about why you have violated the AntiImpoundment and Deficiency Act which says

Mr. TAYLOR. We have not violated that act, and I resent that accusation.

Senator CHILES. Then I want you to keep your explanation to why you have not violated that act and don't go back and tell us about 1970. Mr. TAYLOR. If you will both give me a chance, I would be delighted. That is all I am asking for. May I have that chance?

Senator CHILES. Yes, sir; but don't go back and give us a history back to 1970. This administration has now said we want to cut Amtrak entirely. We want to cut the SBA entirely. Are they going to come in and say back to 1970 we had so many employees?

Mr. TAYLOR. All I am saying is, please play off the history against the background of this chart, which shows that this administration came into power in 1981 and that we have taken over a 55-percent cut since then. There isn't another agency in Washington, DC, that has taken those kind of cuts.

Senator CHILES. You are again making an argument in which you were trying to justify whether you violated the Impoundment Act. Any judge would say you are out of order. You don't have a right to make that argument now.

The act says, Any officer or employee of the U.S. Government or the District of Columbia may not make or authorize any expenditure or obligation exceeding an amount available in an appropriation or fund for the extenditure of that obligation.

Mr. TAYLOR. Will you let me go through the history on this thing? Senator CHILES. As long as you relate to the Impoundment Act and relate to anything that is relevant.

Senator ANDREWS. That is right. And I think what Senator Chiles and I have in mind is that we are in the body of Congress that understands filibusters. You really don't have to go back a decade.

All we are asking about is why you weren't able to live up to the law that cut you 11.1 percent, which is not really that great a cut.

Mr. TAYLOR. We have adhered to that law, and we are not going to violate it. And we are not in violation of it now. If both of you will give me a chance, I will try and give you the history.

ACTION PLAN

Senator ANDREWS. You let us know what you did to comply with that law. That is what we would like to hear. We would like to hear what steps, what specific steps you took to comply with the budget figures that you knew were signed into law for the beginning of this fiscal year and when these steps were taken.

Mr. TAYLOR. May I answer?

Senator ANDREWS. Sure.

Mr. TAYLOR. On February 1, 1984, the President's budget requested 987 full-time permanent staff-years and $53,966,000. On June 11, 1984, the House report contained even more than the President's request, or namely, 998 full-time permanent staff-years and $54,400,000. On June 29, 1984, the Senate report contained 914 full-time permanent staffyears and $48 million.

There was no reasonable basis to conclude in June 1984 that the Senate report levels would be enacted since differences between the two reports are resolved in conference. Given that the RIF's take 75 to 90 days to prepare and implement, the Commission would have had to RIF approximately 200 employees early in October 1984 to stay within the $48 million, had the Commission known it would have been enacted.

But that is the point, we didn't know in June or July or August that the Senate figure was going to prevail, because the House figure was $54,400,000. I submit that is quite a substantial difference. Traditionally there is a conference, and that somewhere in the middle a figure is arrived at.

On October 12, 1984, after the beginning of the fiscal year, the continuing resolution locked the ICC in at the Senate bill levels. Everybody said after the conference was over, if they can't live with it, they can come up for a supplemental. Having 1,070 employees onboard on October 1, 1984, the Commission would have had to RIF at the earliest possible date, which would have been January 1985, over 300 employees to get down to 676 employees to stay within the $48 million. funding limit. That was far below the 914 staff-year figure that had also been authorized in the continuing resolution.

On October 25, 1984, what did the Commission do about this problem? We voted an action plan. And what did the action plan do? It cut all nonessential spending. And also on October 25, 1984, the Commission voted to request supplemental funds and to prepare an emergency plan to bring the spending and staff levels within the continuing resolution limits, if in fact the supplemental was denied.

On January 24, 1985, the Commission approved an emergency furlough plan: All employees, 1 day per week, 26 work days, between April 15 and October 1, 1985, if in fact the supplemental is denied. Nobody has taken this committee for granted.

And in January and February 1985, we formally RIF'd 38 employees. This, in conjunction with attrition, has reduced our onboard strength to 974, which is consistent with the staff-years sought in the supplemental request.

FURLOUGH PLAN

Senator CHILES. Did you start that 1-day-a-week furlough in January or did you say you would do that at some future time?

Mr. TAYLOR. We voted to do it, Senator, and the latest possible date we could begin it as of that time was April 1. We, through attrition, because of the cloud of the furlough hanging over everybody's head

Senator CHILES. In January, February, and March you didn't do anything?

Ms. GRADISON. We are in compliance, Senator. We have a dollar figure which we have been given to spend for our fiscal year. We know how many dollars and cents we have, we know how many people we have.

In planning for our budget, we have made a request for a supplemental. If we didn't get a supplemental, we knew in order to comply with the funding provided by the Senate and in order to be in compliance with the Anti-Deficiency Act we would have to go forward with the furlough. So we are in compliance.

APPORTIONMENT

Senator CHILES. You are saying you are in compliance with subparagraph 1512 that says: "Except as provided in this subchapter, an obligation for a definite period shall be apportioned to prevent obligation or expenditure at a rate that would indicate a necessity for a deficiency or supplemental appropriation for that period"?

Mr. TAYLOR. Senator, we have a special apportionment from OMB. They approved our supplemental, in total, everything we asked for. And we asked, so as not to be in violation of the act, for a special apportionment of those funds so we would not be in violation.

We would not run out of money until the middle of August, and we are not going to allow that to happen either. If we don't get any supplemental out of this committee, we are going to adopt the furloughing plan. And the Commission has already voted to do that.

And the last date we have to begin that operation is April 14. So if we don't get some positive word from this committee by April 11, we are into the furloughing program.

This Commission is not going to violate the Anti-Deficiency Act, and we have not violated it now. The OMB has given us a special apportionment of those funds.

Senator CHILES. Let me tell you what I see this Commission is prepared to do. This Commission is prepared to say, we don't give a damn what they said in the Congress about what the total dollar figure is, we are going to run this with the same number of employees just as if we had $53,463,000. That is the way we are going to run it, and we are going to run it right to the wall.

And then those guys up there will have a choice as to whether they are going to require us to furlough all these people and make all them wait because it isn't going to hurt any of us because our salaries are set by law so we will sit up here fat and happy and it will be the employees that they will have to worry about. And they won't do that, they will give us that supplemental.

If that isn't defiance of Congress, I have never seen it. And I have been here 15 years.

Mr. TAYLOR. Senator, we haven't done that. You haven't painted the proper picture.

Senator CHILES. Have you ever contacted me and said there is a problem here?

Mr. TAYLOR. I have tried for 2 weeks to meet with you. I have also tried to meet with Senator Byrd. I have tried to meet with all of the people on this committee.

Senator CHILES. When did that start?

Mr. TAYLOR. So you would know what was going on.

Senator CHILES. Was that in January? When did that start?

Mr. TAYLOR. My legislative affairs counsel has been trying for some time to get an appointment to see you.

Senator ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, you and members of your staff have met with me on a number of occasions. At no time did I give you or any of your staff any hope that we were, of course, going to restore immediately to the number that you wanted.

Mr. TAYLOR. That's absolutely correct, Mr. Chairman.

Senator ANDREWS. Don't give the impression that somehow or another you had to do what you did because you said you couldn't meet with us and get the proper message. You met with me, as did other members of the Commission, and we told you flat out, that this country has a deficit problem and that everybody ought to share in approaching the solution of that deficit.

And what we are saying is you haven't. And now you are coming in, way late in the game, and saying, please help us from having to RIF these career people down there while you sit in your very posh offices and have your wonderful time twiddling your thumbs or whatever. I am glad you are meeting occasionally together, and it is good to see the whole Commission together. Based on what we heard a year ago, that is a change.

But if this Commission can't take an 11-percent cut in the face of the problems that face this Nation, some haven't got the message of the President. You are sitting back there and saying, but of course we felt that the law was going to be changed, and of course we felt that the Senate figure that was published in July was not going to be held to.

The House didn't even act on a bill. The Senate figure prevailed because the House was dilatory in its movement of this particular bill and anybody who understood the process should have known before October 12, when it was signed into law by the President, that you had to make an 11-percent cut.

Mr. TAYLOR. Do you seriously believe, Mr. Chairman, we should have taken the Senate figure last summer, before there had been any

Senator ANDREWS. You sure as heck should have obeyed it when it was signed into law by the President on October 12. If you wanted, you know, to guess what was going on, you could have had a pretty good indication of that figure.

Mr. TAYLOR. Are you seriously contending that the Commission should have gotten out a crystal ball and last summer, because the Senate had come up with a $48 million figure and in effect committed