OCR Text |
Show 80 WAR FOR THE COLORADO RIVER the Arizona Farm Bureau Federation. "This is a matter of common honesty and fair dealing," he said of the project. Senator McCarran had a statement to make. Arizona, he said, wanted "a political settlement in Congress. The water rights involved here are states' rights, not subject to disposition by Congress." McFarland said he believed the Arizona testimony had shown there was no need for litigation. Shaw didn't agree, and stated that the Arizona testi- mony had "demonstrated the correctness of California's thesis: i.e., that there exists between California and Arizona a controversy." He called Carson's statement that there was no controversy, that all issues had been settled, "evident sophistry." It was nearly five o'clock in the afternoon when Millikin said: "The further hearings will go over until we get the official report from the Bureau of Recla- mation and the reports of the states and other interested parties, as provided by the O'Mahoney-Millikin Amend- ment." It was now certain that the 80th Congress would pass into history without approval of S. 1175. But California lawyers and engineers could be as certain that promptly with the opening of the 81st Congress, in January 1949, the Central Arizona Project would be reintroduced, and they would face an even harder fight to prevent its passage. The Central Arizona Project fight was becoming a national issue. Stories were beginning to appear in eastern and southern newspapers, and they dealt not alone with the merits of the project but with the plans |