OCR Text |
Show -40- when approved by each of the seven States signatory thereto, and shall have approved said compact without conditions save that of such 6-State approval, and the President by public proclamation shall have so declared, and further, until the State of California, by act of its legislature, shall agree irrevocably and unconditionally with the United States and for the benefit of the States of Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, as an express covenant and in consideration of the passage of this act, that the aggregate annual consumptive use (diversions less returns to the river) of the water of and from the Colorado River for use in the State of California, including all uses under contracts made under the provisions of this act and all water necessary for the supply of any rights which may now exist, shall not exceed 4,400,000 acre-feet of the waters apportioned to the lower basin States by the Colorado River compact, plus not more than one-half of any excess or surplus waters unapportioned by said compact, such uses always to be subject to the terms of said compact. Mr. Bratton. Mr. President, I propose to amend the amendment of the Senator from Colorado by striking out the word "six" in line 2, on page 3, and inserting in lieu thereof the word "four," so that the language will read "shall not exceed 4,400,000 acre-feet." Mr. President, it is perfectly obvious to all of us that we have an immense project here, respecting which the two States, California and Arizona, can not agree. The dispute has narrowed itself primarily to 400,000 acre-feet of water, California saying that 4,600,000 acre-feet is her irreducible minimum, and Arizona insisting that California shall be limited to 4,200,000 acre-feet. If this legislation shall be effectuated, the dam constructed, and the river controlled, and the benefits designed to be accomplished by the measure given full fruition, these States must ratify the compact. In my judgment that will never be accomplished if we give to one all that she asks and deny to the other everything she seeks. It seems to me, therefore, Mr. President, that in justice to the two States, they having been unable to agree, we should tender our offices by dividing the difference and |
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] : California exhibits. |