Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" <br /> <br />Senator Downey opened the quality questian beginning on page 2816 <br /> <br />wherein he suggests that the treaty is nat clear that Mexico. must take the <br /> <br />water regardless af quality. Contll1uin9 on page 2817 Senatar Dawney states <br /> <br />that the water will in ail probability be about 3,000 ppm which is unusable. <br /> <br />Senatar Dawney also. saught to interject into. the debate the idea that the <br /> <br />employment af cansumptive use as the yardstick to. measure this quantity <br /> <br />of the right protects against the salt problem inasmuch as more water quantity <br /> <br />wise is given to make the stated cansumptive use when salt cantent of the <br /> <br />water raises. After a statement by Senatar Miilikin to. the effect that the <br /> <br />Mexican burden is not based on consumptive use but rather is based upan <br /> <br />a delivered stated quantity of water, Senator Downey admitted that Mexican <br /> <br />burden was not based on cansumptive use, but he claimed that the treaty is <br /> <br />ambiguous on the question of quality and he sets farth the predictian of dire <br /> <br />consequences in the follawing language at page 2818: <br /> <br />"Cansider what might happen. Suppose that 25 or 30 years <br />f,rom-naw-M exleo-begin s-to-g et-a,n-eXGe s s-ive-amount-of- return <br />flaw and that it is so saline that it begins to make her land <br />unpraductive, and she must begin to. reduce her irrigation. Why, <br />Mr. President. if she were to go before a court of international <br />arbitratian she would, of caurse, abtain relief. I do not believe <br />that the American leaders wauld then have the termerity to. <br />say to. the internatianal caurt, 'Mexico is obligated under the <br />treaty to take water however poar its quality. 0 As a matter of <br />fact, Mr. President, the distinguished chairman of the Fareign <br />Relatians Cammittee will not let that be said in plain terms right <br />now, for fear the treaty will not be ratified by Mexico. What <br />kind af an unreal world are we moving in? Are we making this <br />treaty for same kind af a temparary effect upan the world and <br />upon Mexico in particular or are we creating and settling rights <br />in perpetuity? I assert that we are being asked to create a dacu- <br />ment sa absurd and grotesque that it wiil be a foundatian af future <br />contraversies and lawsuits almost beyond measure. <br /> <br />B 32 <br />