My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09593
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09593
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:54:40 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:44:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.300.40.A
Description
Colorado River Compact
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
11/20/1922
Author
Co. R Compact Comm.
Title
Minutes of Colorado Compact Commission - Meeting #21
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />102 <br /> <br />MR. IL\UELE: I think probably thoro has boen aomc cenfusien ef <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />language in the ~ct of Cengress, but the Censtitution dees net centemplate <br /> <br />anything mere than a consent te a cempact of this kind and of course that <br />can boehangod by an ,\d of Congress. I th'ink we should follow the <br />language of the Constitution and mako it a consent. The ~ct already passed <br /> <br />.llf <br /> <br />is nothing more than a consent to negotiations. <br /> <br />MR. DAVIS: The language j_s a consent te onter into a compact. That <br /> <br />is what the ~ct says. <br /> <br />CI:L\JRMMJ HOOVER: The actual difference is not very material, <br /> <br />because Congress has to act one l'iay or the ether, vrhether it acts by <br /> <br />approval or by consent. Suppose Cengress again consents by legislation <br /> <br />it doesn't materially affect it, they themselves can rcverse their 01'/ll <br /> <br />actien if thcy like, Can't they? <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />MR. I:L\MELE: They can. <br /> <br />MR. DAVIS: Have yeu any idca en that, Judge Sloan? <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />JUDGE SLOAN: I think you are quite right, Judge. I den't take it <br />that tho word "consent" is of such definite import that equivalent Innguage <br />may not express it. An approval is a censent always. <br /> <br />CI:L\IRM1\.N HOOVER: Consent is not necessarily approval, though. <br /> <br />JUDGE SLO~N: Consent is not necessarily approval. In thc aense, <br /> <br />thcugh, of the constitution of the United States I think they are synenymeus <br />terms. It doesn't necessarily mean the Congress ef the United States shall <br /> <br />approve every form ef it, te be sure, but if the~do approve it, it is <br /> <br />consent nnd the Act of Congress specifically pl'ovides for an approval. <br /> <br />, <br />CI:L\TI1.!iL\N HOOVER: I was 1'fOndering if some technologists get up in <br />Congress and say "we don It approve this thing under the Censtitution" <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />how is it going to affect your pact? <br />!.lR. l:L\l.lELE: I think as Judge Sloan says, that the Congress in this <br />Act used the word "approval" as a synonym of consent and that being true <br /> <br />.. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.