OCR Text |
Show Appendix G SUMMARY OF TESTIMONY ON HJ. RES. 225 - 80th CONGRESS To summarize testimony of California and Nevada and re- ports of various federal departments on HJ. Res. 225 in the previous (80th) Congress, a brief was prepared by California at- torneys for the use of the Judiciary subcommittee considering HJ. Res. 3. The conclusions of the brief were: 1. Arizona and California have been locked in controversy over the meaning of the Colorado River Compact and associ- ated documents for a quarter century. There is no prospect of settling the controversy by negotiation or arbitration. 2. The existence of this controversy imperils the orderly de- velopment of the lower basin of the Colorado River. As said by the Commissioner of Reclamation July 17, 1947 (Hearings, p. 95): ". . . further development of the water resources of the Colorado River Basin, particularly large-scale develop- ment, is seriously handicapped, if not barred, by lack of determination of the rights of the individual states to utilize the waters of the Colorado River system. The water supplies for projects to accomplish such development might be assured as a result of compact among the states of the separate basins, appropriate courts or congressional action, or otherwise." 3. Two of the three Lower Division states, California and Nevada, seek a judicial determination of the controversy by submission of their case to the United States Supreme Court. 4. As the United States is an indispensable party to such a case in the Supreme Court, the consent of Congress is necessary (Report of Department of Justice, Hearings, p. 30). 5. The action by Congress granting such consent in such a form as is now presented by HJ. Res. 3, 81st Congress, is in accord with the program of the President (Report of the Bureau of the Budget, Hearings, p. 29). |