9367 ‎(2)‎

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 9367
• Author: Colorado Water Workshop.
• Title: Proceedings
• USFW Year: 1992.
• USFW - Doc Type: Colorado Water Workshop July 22-24, 1992.
• Copyright Material: NO

The Law of the River
Panel Discussion

Moderator: Paul Frohardt, Administrator,
Colorado Water Quality Control Commission

Question: Andy Williams suggested that although he does not believe
that it is likely that Congress would do so in the near future,
Congress does have the authority to change the current results, the
current affect of the'Compact and impose some different results on the
states. I wonder if any of the other speakers would like to comment
on that?

John Carlson: The Colorado General Assembly passed a resolution this
year stating that Congress did not have that power to modify the
Colorado River Compact. My owner personal view is very much like
Andy's. I think there are a series of Supreme Court decisions that
suggest that a federal law, which a compact is, can be modified by
Congress. I think the more interesting question is, when are there
sufficient political constituencies to change a compact, or change
federal laws? Although California has all the votes in the world in
the House, they only have two United States Senators. In the Upper
Basin states and the sort of forgotten Lower Basin states there are
substantially greater numbers of Senators. I think the moral of
modern times is that Congress has a hard time passing anything. I do
not think our great threat is that Congress is going to repeal, or
take away, the benefits of the Compact. It seems to me that a bigger
threat to future uses, or future needs, in the Upper Basin is economic
power, which maybe concentrated elsewhere. If the Compact and the
Law of the River do not withstand some sort of regulatory authority
over the operation of market systems then it seems to me that we have
worse problems as a state. That is, if people share my view that we
are trying to maintain and build a better society here as opposed to
San Diego -- maybe the highest aspirations of most Colorado people is
to move to San Diego. That I do not know.

Carroll Multz: Maybe, I am riding the fence, but it would appear to
me that a lot of legislation, both at the federal level and the state
level has been passed in the name of health, safety, and welfare. I
can envision a time when it will be very difficult for even Congress
to do anything other than to respect the use of water by populated and
congested areas and take that water away and reconfigure it, or return
it to agricultural or industrial use. I am not saying I agree or
disagree with my venerable colleague from Grand Junction. However,
I would say that in the sake of humanity it is going to be very
difficult to take water glasses out of the mouths of little kids when.
health, safety and welfare require it.

John Carlson: I think that is probably true. I would like to comment
on that. I do not think that is the kind of issue we face in water
allocation. California has, thus far, rigidly resisted any kind of
market operation within the State of California. Colorado happens to
have a highly developed market system with some obvious constraints
that the economist would criticize. In California the strategy has

34