Evening star., 1934-03-02
PAY RESTORATION
Of 1OPCT. |S-SEEN
BYH0USE LEADERS
Elimination Of Restriction
of Salaries of $1,000
Is Predicted.
Committee TO DELAY
ACTION FOR WEEK
Steiwer Says Senate Increased
Fund Only $11s, s,000,o ,o0o-Dis-
putes Byrnes' Figures.

receive at least 1O per cent reSIO-
ration in salaries under the inde-
pendent Offices bill and that the
Borah amendment will be eliminated.
The latter places prohibition against
restoring any cut in any salary in
excess of $4,000.
Democratic and Republican lead
ers today emphasized the admins
tration has committed itself to resto-
ration of per cent as of February
and another 5 per cent In the ap-
preparation bills beginning July
next.
Some OF the more optimistic men,
bers still insist that if the President
keeps hands of and allows the Appro-
priations Committee and the House
membership free voice, Government
employees may expect full restora-
tion of basic salary, while some of the
Democratic leaders in the House may
be forced to surrender their own con-
victions and lead the fight against a
full restoration.
Chairman Buchanan does not ex-
pect to call the Appropriations Com
mittee together to consider the inde-
pendent offices appropriation bill at
least before the end of next week
and probably not until the week fol-
lowing, when he may then decide to
send the bill to subcommittee for fur
ther hearings.
Figures Disputed.
Meanwhile, Senator Steiwer, Repub-
lican, Of Oregon, came forward with
figures to show that the difference
in cost between the bill as it now
stands and the compromises advo-
Gated by administration leaders in
Congress is only $118,000,000.
He took the floor in the Senate
late yesterday to show that the 1884,
100000 figure used by Senator Byrnes,
Democrat, of South Carolina, in de-
bate few days ago is the total cost
of the pay and veterans provisions,
but emphasized that Senate action
did not add all of this sum to the
measure. Steiwer said that Gin
advertently some figures were in
cluded which did not result from
the action of the Senate"
''The Senator included an item of
$21 100000 which he expressly stated
was made necessary by the executive
order of the President issued on Jan
uary 49," Steiwer continued. There
was also included $215,O00,OOO in
round figures relating to the increase
IN salaries of Federal employees.
Explains Figures.
IAN analysis of that item discloses
the figure he used not only included
the amount resulting from the action
Of the Senate, but it included the en-
tire restoration and embraced as we'll
the first per cent restoration for the
fiscal year 1885, which was provided
in the bill as it passed the House. I
find by making the calculation again,
taking into consideration the amount
resulting from the action of the House,
that the increased amount caused by
the action of the Senate in providing
complete pay restoration is not $2l5,-
100000. but is $152,775,625.
1.-THE total amount added by the
Senate, eliminating the items to which
I have referred, which were inad-
vertently included, is not 1854, 900, 900,
but Is figure approximating
$270,000,0o0.
THAT figure would be literally cor
rect except that neither the Senator
from South Carolina nor the Senator
from Oregon in the consideration of
the matter took into account some
miscellaneous items contained in the
bill, such as automatic promotions and
administrative promotions. However,
these items will not to any consider
able degree affect the figures"
"OnIy s118, 200, 900 Higher"
Carrying his analysis a step further,
Senator Steiwer said the cost of the
bill as it passed the Senate Is only
$118,000,000 more than it would have
been if the amendments of Senator
Byrnes on pay and veterans had been
adopted by the Senate.
This is large sum-" Senator
steiwer observed, "but it is not COM
parable with the figure of 1884 00O,-
600. It does not approximate the
corrected figure of $27o,00o 900, and
in relation to the appropriations that
are voted by this Congress in these
days, it is not such staggering
sum-
After he had brought out that
S270,000 1000 is the difference between
the Senate measure and what the
House and the President had pre-
Nously approved, Senator Steiwer
continued:
"Mr. President, now come to a
feature which to me is far more
important. The difference in costs
between the House provision and the
Senate amendment Is one thing. The
difference in costs between the ac-
ton of the Senate by the passage of
the bill and the proposals submitted
by the Senator from South Carolina
with either the actual or tacit ap-
proval of the administration, pre-
sents an entirely different question
In order to arrive at that difference
I requested the clerk of the Com
mittee on Appropriations to prepare
the figures showing the exact differ
ences between the bill as it passed
the Senate and the proposals made
by the able Senator from South Caro-
lima. The clerk of the committee
resorted, in compliance with my re-
quest, to the facilities of the Vet
erans' Administration, to the Bureau
Of the Budget, and possibly to other
official sources. I have here. and in
just moment will send to the desk
the figures indicating the differences
which are so significant. Before !
do so, however, I want to state
briefly what they are.
$50 far as the pay cut restoration
is concerned in the fiscal year 1884
there is no difference, because in the
proposal made by the Senator from
South Carolina there was to be 5
Yer can't restoration affectiua Fab.