The Landis report now comes out again and affirms the other position that we should have a strong Chairman, that we should have better agency direction and that the chairmen of all our commissions should be appointed by the President.

What is your view regarding the setting up of an administrative committee within the Bureau of the Budget or the White House to keep a watchdog check on oversight of the agencies?

I believe the Landis report models its views along this line after the Administrative Court setup to keep a check on the numbers of cases and the progress of the courts.

Someone has suggested that such a setup would bring about more control over the independent agencies and commissions.

Mr. GOFF. I have been going through this hastily. I was familiar with this very fine report. I notice here the following-if I may

read this.

Mr. EVINS. It is good reading. Go ahead.

Mr. GoFF. He says, referring to the Hoover Commission report: The appeal of the Hoover Commission for efficiency as applied to the independent agencies has not taken into account the necessity for the independence of these agencies in the public interest. Moreover, a strong case can be made to the effect that on balance there has been a net loss in efficiency. But if it were assumed that the opposite were true, they had indeed succeeded in accomplishing their avowed objective of increasing efficiency, the question then arises as to whether the price paid in the form of lessened independence is worth the gain of so-called enhanced efficiency. The answer is emphatically in the negative.

The olderly processes of government, the faith of the people in all segments of business-small and large-in fair and equitable treatment, are rooted in the independence of the regulatory agencies. No price is too high to maintain the inviolability of this independence. When to this overriding consideration there is added the fact that the measures taken in the name of efficiency have actually contributed little toward that objective, the case becomes obvious. The restraints upon the independence of the regulatory agencies must be removed.

That was the statement, and there are a lot of other pertinent statements in the report.

Mr. EVINS. Even in view of the report from which the Commissioner has been reading, I do not think we can make any argument for inefficiency. Efficiency perhaps is not the most important thing, but we still should try for improved efficiency as well as preserving the independency of your Commission and all the Commissioners-as arms of the Congress.

Mr. YATES. That report seeks the independence of the agencies because they were not really independent over the last few years. Was there not executive direction over most of them?

Mr. TUGGLE. Never in the case of the Interstate Commerce Commission.

Mr. EVINS. This Commission-the ICC-has been the pioneer and the one we have looked to as a model after which other agencies may have patterned their statutes and practices.

Mr. MURPHY. When you speak of the increase, I do not know that I understand the question. Is it from the increased expense of the Commission's increasing workload that you have reference to?

INCREASE IN PERSONNEL AND APPROPRIATIONS

Mr. EVINS. You have about 2,500 employees now. You have more and more employees and more and more appropriations.

Mr. MURPHY. Over a period of years, and I have been on the Commission going on 6 years, if you look back at the legislation enacted and the new duties placed on the Commission, and the fact we were on a very limited budget for some time it shows a need for increased appropriations. Also, the volume of work has increased over what we had 10 years ago. In 1958, for example, we received quite an increase in our workload as a result of the Transportation Act of 1958. Mr. EVINS. The answer is that you have additional legislation and an increased workload.

Mr. MURPHY. Plus an increased economy, an increase in salaries, and an increase in the motor carrier industry?

Mr. EVINS. I believe it was Judge Brandeis who said bigness begets inefficiency and I wonder, as the Commission grows, if we are not becoming a little less efficient?

The President recently announced the abolition of 17 committees. Were any of those in the Interstate Commerce Commission?

Mr. HUTCHINSON. I do not think any touched the Commission. Mr. EVINS. Do you have any plan with a view to improving efficiency?

Mr. HUTCHINSON. As I mentioned earlier, I believe one important action we have taken in line with your question is the reduction in the number of divisions. That is something specific I can point to in answer to your question.

Mr. EVINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Ostertag.

Mr. OSTERTAG. On that very point, I think it might be said, Mr. Chairman, that the Interstate Commerce Commission, by virtue of conditions and circumstances and developments here in these United States, has had added areas of responsibility and naturally your workload has grown. When you look back over the development of the automotive industry and the use of vehicles on the highways alone, without considering any of the other aspects of transportation, you can see why your agency has not only grown in importance but your duties and responsibilities have grown immeasurably. In view of this, your requests for increases in personnel and overall expenses from the time I have been associated with this committee seem to have been reasonably modest, but at the same time the requests have always been associated with inspections and workloads and problems that seem to have developed.

ACTIVITIES IN TRANSPORTATION FIELD

I would like to raise this general question with regard to the economic picture in the transportation field, as to what is being done or can be done and what your Commission studies and analyses show as to, for example, the plight of the railroads. Also we have many important matters now before the Congress, such as highway legis lation involving more taxes and many important changes with regard to its application and effect on transportation generally. Where are we going in this field, particularly with respect to the railroads and trucks and aviation?

Mr. HUTCHINSON. The Commission is very much concerned, Mr. Ostertag, in this area, and we have some studies in progress now that I think are directly related to the problem you have in mind, and if I may I would like to ask Director Margolin to discuss these programs in the field of economics as related to the transportation system.

Mr. MARGOLIN. The Commission authorized recently studies to be undertaken in the field of various phases of railroad mergers and consolidations, and that has been initiated. We have also been authorized to make a study of the so-called piggyback rates. At the same time, we have been requested to try to keep on top of the various changes and developments that are taking place as to their impact on the carriers under the Commission's jurisdiction.

You referred earlier to developments in the aviation field and the highway field that pertain, again, to carriers under the Commission's regulations. We try to bring to the Commission's attention the problems in that field.

Mr. OSTERTAG. Has a recommendation been made by the administration for a complete review of the Transportation Act generally that would have a bearing on this whole picture?

Mr. MARGOLIN. Recently there was a report of the staff of the Senate Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce that covered the entire field of transportation. A great deal of that report is relevant to the functions and responsibilities of the Interstate Commerce Commission, but it went beyond that, of course. It went into the fields of ocean transportation and aviation. We have been asked to take a look at that particular report as it pertains to the responsibilities of the Commission. They asked us to do that, and we are following through.

Mr. HUTCHINSON. This report that Director Margolin referred to is rather far reaching and rather lengthy and it will take some time to analyze it.

Mr. OSTERTAG. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Ostertag, that report was filed last year. How long does it take your distinguished staff to look at it?

Mr. TUGGLE. The Senate committee staff released a 50-page summary earlier, but the entire report of about 900 pages was not issued until about a month ago.

Mr. THOMAS. The 50-page advance sheets was long enough; was it not?

Mr. HUTCHINSON. It provided some extra reading, yes.

Mr. TUGGLE. It raises issues concerning which different modes of transportation are in violent disagreement. Of course, it will have to be reviewed by the Congress.

Mr. THOMAS. This Bureau has been in existence about 80 years, so I doubt this special study by the committee on the other side raised any problems that these gentlemen had not been thinking of, either themselves or their predecessors. So it did not raise any new questions; did it?

Mr. MARGOLIN. It perhaps did not raise any new questions pertaining to the duties of the Commission, but it did endeavor to bring up to date some future problems or issues that may come into play. As an example of that, they referred to what is happening, in their view, to the common carrier industry, and there was an implication

that if the present trend continues the common carrier industry as we know it today will be in a very difficult position a few years hence.

So while it may not have pointed out any new problems, there are new and pending developments-for example, the highway program, among others that raise new difficulties that come before the Commission.

Mr. HUTCHINSON. The report certainly brings into focus some of these problems that a lot of us have been thinking about for some time.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Jonas.

INCREASE IN CASELOAD

Mr. JONAS. Mr. Chairman, I was concerned at the comment of my friend from Tennessee, which is now in the record, indicating that the Commission, notwithstanding the fact its funds have been almost doubled in the last 10 years, has been falling further and further behind in its work and becoming more and more inefficient.

I would like to ask you a question or two along that line, but first I would like to have the record show that of the $11,976,965 increase in the budget for your Commission since 1952, $5,158,000, or almost half of it, is brought about by pay increases voted by Congress, some of which were vetoed by the President and overruled by the Congress. So you are not responsible for about half of that increase; are you?

Mr. HUTCHINSON. No, Mr. Jonas; we are not.

Mr. JONAS. Now, in order for the record to show whether you are falling further and further behind, I think some comparison of your work performance, of your workload in 1952 and in 1960 insofar as increased workloads are concerned, increased filings, increased number of cases, would be helpful in order for us and for those who read this record to understand really whether you are making progress in your work. Would it be possible to prepare a table showing that? Mr. HUTCHINSON. I think it would, Mr. Jonas.

Mr. JONAS. In the interest of the Commission and in order to be completely fair about it, I think the record should contain some such comparisons.

Mr. HUTCHINSON. I think we can supplement the record on that if it is desired.

Includes attorney-advisers, report writers, and Board members.

2 Statisties for pending proceedings to revoke operating rights not available or included prior to 1954 fiscal year, accordingly pending caseload adjusted to include 141 such proceedings.

Statistics for complaint, rulemaking, and revocation proceedings not available or included prior to fiscal year 1956; accordingly pending caseload adjusted to include 91 such proceedings. Statistics for peading proceedings to deviate from rezular routes not available or included prior to 1957 fiscal year; accordingly pending caseload adjusted to include 6 such proceedings.

Includes 731 proceedings instituted as a result of Public Law 85-163 (71 Stat. 411).

• Includes 95) applications for motor carrier operating authority and 321 rate investigations on previously exempt commodities made subject to economic regulation as a result of the Transportation Act of 1958,

Type of proceedings included under the caption "Cases Handled Under the Administrative Procedure Act."

Applications to construct, extend, acquire, or abandon lines of railroads; consolidate, merge, purchase, lease (rail-motor, and water); issue securities or to assume obligations (rail or motor); discontinue or change train and ferry services (notices, investigations); acquire permanent motor carrier, water carrier, and freight forwarder operating authority.

Complaints, rulemaking, and revocation proceedings.
Complaints with respect to rates, fares, and charges.
Investigations with respect to rates, fares, and charges.
Investigation and suspension.

Ex parte (increased freight rates, etc.)

Agreements between carriers.

Applications for relief from long- and short-haul charges.

Type of proceedings included under the caption "Cases Not Handled Under the Administrative Procedure Act."

Applications to hold position of officer or director in more than one carrier; guarantee loans to railroads; acquire temporary motor and water carrier operating authority; transfer and lease motor carrier operating authorities; file State certificates; deviate from regular routes.

Proceedings to revoke operating authority without hearing.

Protested rate adjustments.

For relief from long- and short-haul charges.

In the light of increasing workloads by reason of growth in the economy and growth of the carriers that are subject to the Commission's jurisdiction, and in the light of the additional duties that the Congress has given to us, I would not agree at all that the Commission has fallen behind. It is true that these statistics are not quite as good, for last year perhaps, as 1 or 2 years immediately preceding that, but I think in the long-range view the Commission is making pregress. But I recognize at the same time this may be difficult to evalu