OCR Text |
Show CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE The assertion of such priorities is a menace against which these States here assembled earnestly protest. It is a gross injustice to take Federal money which, in part, is money of these protesting States and use it to build up or add to water priorities which Arizona may attempt to assert against them. 2. There is no way of sufficient legal certainty to subject Arizona's water priorities, including that which would be connected with the Gila Valley project, to the Colorado River compact, except by requiring Arizona's adherence thereto as a condition precedent to the availability of any Federal aid. The adherence could be- (a) By supplemental compact between Arizona and preferably all of the Colorado River States, or at least with the upper States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, whereby she subjects herself and her water users to the compact just as fully and completely as the other States have done; or (b) By act of self-limitation passed by her legislature and approved by her Governor, whereby she agrees irrevocably with the United States, for the benefit of preferably each of the remaining Colorado River States or at least of each of the States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, with the right of each to sue or defend thereon, that each thereof shall have the same rights and interests in the Colorado River system as if Arizona had signed and ratified the Colorado River compact when the other States did. 3. If Arizona is not willing to adhere to the Colorado River compact in one way or the other, her unwillingness can be evidence of only one thing-an attempt to assert against these protesting States water priorities inconsistent with the Colorado River compact. Can it be that Arizona wants all the benefits of the Colorado River development without assuming any of the burdens or limitations Incident thereto? 4. Construction on the Gila Valley project being still in its infancy and the need of Arizona for water from the Colorado River system being so great, there is not the slightest question but that Arizona would adhere to the Colorado River compact in order to obtain water, if the Government would prescribe adherence as a condition precedent to availability of Federal aid. The protesting States are not protesting against water for Arizona's use from the Colorado River system. Indeed, they want her to have it. Their protest is directed solely against her pro-cural of water without submitting herself as to all of her priorities, as the other States have done to the Colorado River compact as a condition precedent to availability of Federal aid. She should not be allowed to subject the Gila Valley project to the compact while at the same time exempting her other projects, even if this could be done legally. 5. Arizona could call a special session of her legislature and within, a few days could adhere to the compact by act of self-limitation as suggested. |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |