OCR Text |
Show A compact in order to be binding upon the signatory states must be ratified by their respective legislatures. In practice a compact is nego- tiated by commissioners appointed by the governors of the participating states, either under a special law authorizing such appointments for par- ticular negotiations or under general statutory provisions. A negotiated compact signed by these commissioners is then submitted to the legislatures of the signatory states for ratification. Two different procedures for obtaining Congressional consent have been recognized. Under one, an act is passed by Congress granting its consent to the making of a compact. This is followed by the compact negotiation, ratification by the legislatures of the signatory states and final submission of the compact to Congress for approval. Under the other procedure, the compact is negotiated and ratified by the states without previous Congressional consent and in such case the approval of the compact terms as made, implies previous consents It should be borne in mind that the mere consent to make a compact, without its specific terms being before Congress does not consti- tute Congressional approval. The required constitutional consent is not effectuated until the full text of the compact is before Congress and approved by that body. 5. CERTAIN COMPACT PRACTICES ADVISABLE. There is no reason, nor would it seem that Congress has the constitutional power, to change this basic procedure. On the other hand, experience has demonstrated the advisability of certain practices in compact making which may be noted as follows; (a) In most cases, it is advisable to obtain previous- Congressional consent to make a water compact before attempting to negotiate its terms. Such previous consent in all cases where water adjustments involve federal interests should carry with it the designation, either directly or through authorized appointment, of a federal representative to participate in the negotiations. Where federal interests are involved, they should be reviewed and correlated with state interests in the negotiation stage rather than left for consideration when the compact reaohes Congress. However, it would not seem to be advisable to make this an unalterable practice. For Congress to adopt such a rigid rule of procedure smacks too much of the disposition to curb and limit states in their legitimate activities. There have been and are now many instances of interstate river adjustments which only involve allocations among the states and rules governing the utilization of the water, and which in no way infringe upon, or have any relationship to, federal jurisdiction. In such cases, the representatives of the states should be al- lowed to exercise their discretion as to appropriate procedure within basic principles established by the federal and state constitutions. (b) No compact should be negotiated without adequate studies, investi- gations and knowledge of the water resource involved and its most efficient use in relation to the economy of the region. Compacts do not generally make provision for specific public works, but the policy established by their terms cannot be formulated without dependable knowledge of the interrelation of all of the physical factors. This entails consideration of future pro- jects, of the utilization and conservation of water and of regulation of river flow for various purposes including the prevention of floods. To maike |