Which is why Fiorina's statement is gutless. I'd like to see the courts try to specify how many people I need to "protect" the desert tortoise.
Your statement does not make any sense. Why is it gutless?
Let's assume you are president. The EPA has 10,000 more employees than you think they need. You send a budget to Congress requesting the 10,000 positions be eliminated from the budget. Congress ignores you, and appropriates funds for the entire existing staffing level.
So, what do you do as president? Do you veto the appropriation bill and shut down all departments included in that bill? That is one option, but one few presidents or Congresses have been able to sustain for long. Do you fire the 10,000 employees anyway, even though they are protected by the Civil Service act and possibly union contracts? If so, how does that make you different from Obama, deciding which laws to enforce and which ones to ignore?