| OCR Text |
Show 154 WAR FOR THE COLORADO RIVER 11 - The bill would approve the benefit-cost ratio, a device not sanctioned by existing reclamation law, to test the economic justification of those projects. 12 - The project is not self-liquidating, as claimed by the Reclamation Bureau. A new theme song of the Upper Basin states pro- claimed that California hoped to get them mixed up in the Supreme Court case so that it could sneak off with all the Colorado River. The Denver Post and the Salt Lake City papers had done a good job of convincing their readers that California, led by a sinister Los Angeles gang, was selfish and unscrupulous in all water matters. Rep. Rogers of Colorado sang the new song loud and clear to the House, adding a verse containing the charge that California wanted to get the Upper Basin states into the lawsuit only to block the crsp.172 What both Rogers and the Upper Basin papers con- veniently forgot was that it had been Arizona, their friend, which had sued California; that the basic Colo- rado River Compact was involved, and, therefore, whatever decisions the court issued would affect all states of the basin, not just those on the lower river. But the charges made up a good propaganda line, and there were many persons willing to swallow anything derogatory to California. The trouble was that it wasn't good for very long. The Supreme Court, acting on California's motion, made Utah and New Mexico parties to the litigation. Both of these states contained areas which were within the geographical limits of the Lower Basin, and con- tributed some water to the lower river. This move by the high court, and the refusal of the House Rules Committee to release the crsp bill to the |
