| OCR Text |
Show COLORADO RIVER LITIGATION 569 tioning the waters among the Lower Basin States and distributing them to users in the States. The session convened on December 3,1928, on the fifth the Senate took up the bill,65 nine days later the bill with significant amendments passed the Senate,66 four days after that the House concurred in the Senate's action,67 and on the twenty-first the President signed the bill.68 When the bill first reached the Senate floor, it had a provision, added in committee, limiting California to 4,600,000 acre-feet,69 and Senator Hayden on December 6 proposed reducing that share to 4,200,000.™ The next day, December 7, Mr. Pitt- man, senior Senator from Nevada, vigorously argued that Congress should settle the matter without delay. He said, "What is the difficulty ? We have only minor questions involved here. There is practically nothing involved except a dispute be- tween the States of Arizona and California with regard to the di- vision of the increased water that will be impounded behind the proposed dam; that is all. ... Of the 7,500,000 acre-feet of water let down that river they have gotten together within 400,000 acre- feet. They have got to get together, and if they do not get together Congress should bring them together." 71 The day after that, December 8, New Mexico's Senator Bratton suggested an amendment splitting the difference between the demands of Arizona and California by limiting California to 4,400,000 acre- feet.72 On the tenth, reflecting the prevailing sense of urgency for decisive action, Senator Bratton emphasized that this was not a dis- pute limited simply to two States: "The two States have exchanged views, they have negotiated, they have endeavored to reach an agreement, and until now have been unable to do so. This controversy does not affect those two States alone. It affects other States in the Union and the Govern- ment as well. "Without undertaking to express my views either way upon the subject, I do think that if the two States are unable to agree upon a figure then that we, as a disinterested and friendly agency, should pass a bill which, according to our combined judgment, will justly and equitably settle the controversy. I suggested 4,400,- 000 acre-feet with that in view. I still hold to the belief that some- where between the two figures we must fix the amount, and that this difference of 400,000 acre-feet should not bo allowed to bar and preclude the passage of this important measure dealing with the enormous quantity of 15,000,000 acre-feet of water and involv- ing seven States as well as the Government." 73 The very next day, December 11, this crucial amendment was adopted,74 and on the twelfth Senator Hayden pointed out that the bill settled the dispute over Lower Basin waters by giving 4,400,000 acre- feet to California and 2,800,000 to Arizona: M70 Cong. Rec. 67 (1928). 66 Id., at 603. <" Id., at 837-838. «8 45 Stat. 1057. 69 See S. Rep. No. 592, 70th Cong., 1st Sess. 2 (1928). '• 70 Cong. Rec. 162 (1928). 71 Id., at 232. ™ Id., at 277, 385. » Id., at 333. ™ Id., at 387. 94_497_69------37 |
