My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP05764
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
5001-6000
>
WSP05764
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:19:47 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:15:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
2100
Description
Laws-Acts-Policy Rulings Affecting CWCB and Colorado Water - Federal
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Date
6/4/1921
Author
Delph E Carpenter
Title
Statement of Delph E Carpenter - 06-04-21 - Before the Committee on the Judiciary - House of Representatives - RE-HR 6821
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
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 />000191 <br /> <br />-10- <br /> <br />MR. C!.RP::;NT ~R, Ye s. sir, <br /> <br />..- <br /> <br />MR. MICHEI/SIl.. Have you in "-''Y way oontomplated what expense there <br />would be connoctpd with that? <br /> <br />". <br /> <br />MR. CtRPENT3R. It is very hard to forecast just what the expense <br />will be; it will depend largely upon the extent of t;'e deliberations, <br />But the expense would be limited. in compr1rison wi th the interests <br />involved. For example. Colorado in her bill sets apart an appropria- <br />tion for this, a'non~ other purposes; fl.nd as reg"rds this particular <br />purpose it is provided that Colol'ado shall not only pay the expenses of <br />her comJ:lissioner, but shall likewise p"y her equitable portion of the <br />expenses of the joint commission. Sone of the other States have not <br />directly so legislated; but doubtless they would pay their equitable <br />proportion of the costs of the joint ccmmission. So that the expense to <br />the United States would be purely thet of the compensation of the com- <br />missioner or representative of the United States. <br /> <br />UR. GOODYKOONTZ. The bill is silent as to the compensation of the <br />commissioner. is it r.:.ot? <br /> <br />11R. C'RPS! TER. It is, <br /> <br />MR. GOODYKOONTZ. Do you not think it wOL.1d be necessary or expedi- <br />ent to undertaJ:e to fix hio compensation in the measure? <br /> <br />MR. CARPENTER. I am not familiar with your .,r ooedure in the matter <br />of national appropriations. It was thought and s~gges~ed by several <br />mombers of Congress that the matter of the compensation could, and proba- <br />bly should, be fixed in a subsequont bill. or in some appropriation bill. <br /> <br />,- <br /> <br />MR. MICHE:J!~R. I can see that, BJt to me it seems very important <br />to know what expenses legislation of this kind will ultimately bring <br />about. If we simply authorize the appointment of a commissioner in this <br />bill, of course that carries with it the implied intention to pay what- <br />ever that commissioner is reasonably worth. Now, if We pass this legis- <br />lation and establish the canmission. or authorize the commissioner to <br />act, Usn too next question is that we must pay him, Of course. I would <br />be much better satisfied if I had some idea what your notion was as to <br />what this exponse would be. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />MR. CrHPENTER. It is very hard for me to say. because I do not <br />knew how much Congress might \'/ish to pay such a canmissioner. <br /> <br />~ffi. MICHENER. Well, you are an expert in these matters. <br /> <br />MR. CIltFENnH. Well. 1 will st6.te thisl That owing, in the first <br />place. t c the extreme value of the interests involved, and sec ond, in <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.