and applied beneficially in the United States, flows into the Republic of Mexico. If there is any country on this continent that is thoroughly socialized, that country is Mexico, and its entire resources are applied to the rapid acquisition of a right to use this water, to spreading it on the land, and to a settlement of their people upon that land.

If we do not take steps promptly, Mexico's right to use that water will be superior to ours. As far as I am concerned, I want surveys made in every State of the basin. I want to begin at the headwaters of the stream and find every place where water can be put to use in the United States.

Senator CHAVEZ. Could we put a provision in there to begin at the headwaters of the stream?

Senator HAYDEN. It does not make any difference whether we begin at the headwaters or at the mouth. The point is, if we do not find a use for this water in every State of the basin, the Mexicans will acquire a prior right to its use, and since they have the same water law that we have-the first in use is the first in right-we are very liable to go into some international court of arbitration and find that by our neglect we have not done the things we should have done and that Mexico has acquired the right to the use of this water.

Everyone knows the water law to be that the right to the use of water dates back to the first substantial effort made to apply it upon land.

If an effort is made in every State in the basin to plan where the water can be put to use, and followed with actual use, the appropriation dates back to the time of the survey.

As a practical matter, almost everything that can be done in the two States of the lower basin-I speak of California and Arizona— has already been done. I know of no place where the State of Arizona or the State of California will ask for any further substantial irrigation development. What we have on our hands in both States are uncompleted projects that already have been engineered. The All-American Canal has not been completed to the Coachella Valley. We have started the Gila project at Yuma, but it is a very slow undertaking. The concern of Arizona and California is to secure sufficient funds to keep the existing projects going. The States in the upper basin are concerned with finding feasible locations for new projects.

Senator CHAVEZ. That is my problem at the moment. I want to go along with the Senators from Arizona and California to complete their projects, but in the meantime I would like to be amply protected as far as New Mexico is concerned, to see that Mexico does not get that water just because we have to wait until 1955 to get the money in order to commence construction.

Under the provisions of the bill

Senator HAYDEN. What line are you reading from?

Senator CHAVEZ. We will start with the first item of $1,500,000authorized to be appropriated only for the continuation and extension, under the direction of the Secretary, of studies and investigations by the Bureau of Reclamation for the formulation of a comprehensive plan for the utilization of waters of the Colorado River system for irrigation, electric power, and other purposes, in the States of the upper division and the States of the lower division.

Now, if it is a practical matter that neither Arizona nor California would make any more demands, then we would get a fair proportion of or as much as we were entitled to under the contract with the States, and I would be satisfied in my own mind.

Senator HAYDEN. You understand, of course, that this money is placed in the Treasury of the United States subject to appropriation by Congress. The Bureau of Reclamation, after field studies, decides where to place projects. A Budget estimate is then submitted, and incorporated into the Interior Department appropriation bill, with which the Senator from New Mexico [Mr. Chavez] and I have something to do. I can assure the Senator that I know of no immediate demand in Arizona except to complete what has been begun. I think the Senator from California can state the same thing. What he is primarily concerned with is the completion of what has already been planned, for the use of water through the All-American Canal in California.

Senator CHAVEZ. And the lower water rates, of course, that will prevail under this act.

Senator HAYDEN. The lower what?

Senator CHAVEZ. The lower electric rates, power rates. I am for that, too, but what the Senator said about Mexico might be able to appropriate this water legally, that is what concerns me. I would like to have the provisions of the bill explicit that our rights would be protected from the start.

Senator HAYDEN. I think there is no question about the protection of your rights in any court. If the Congress of the United States appropriates money for the study of a project in Colorado, in Utah, in Wyoming, or New Mexico, the engineering party goes out in the field and determines that if a reservoir is placed here, and a certain canal there, the project will be feasible and practical. After that investigation is made, if the Congress follows it up with due diligence in making appropriations for construction the actual appropriation of water relates back to the day the investigation was begun. There is no question about that.

Senator CHAVEZ. Does not this bill appropriate the money to the Reclamation Bureau without stating which particular States should be covered?

Senator HAYDEN. That is true, because neither you nor I can say where money should be expended.

Senator PITTMAN. Not only that, but the Congress still has control over it.

Senator HAYDEN. The Congress still has control over it. The Reclamation Service is very glad, indeed, to get this fund, because year after year, as Senator King knows, we have sought in every way to get additional sums of money for these studies. Here is a special fund that is applicable solely to the States of the Basin, and is derived from funds and revenues from a project within the basin, and it relieves the main reclamation fund of our immediate necessities, so it is beneficial to everybody concerned,

Senator CHAVEZ. If the statement of the Senator from Arizona is correct, and I am sure it is correct, in his own mind anyway, what is the necessity of including the States of the lower division in this general plan?

Senator HAYDEN. I want to be perfectly frank, Senator

Senator KING. I am opposed to that, may I say. I think it is unfair to the upper basin States, including New Mexico. We are not protected; we have got no benefit at all from these appropriations. California is the principal beneficiary, and this change which is made now will result in an enormous benefit to California, perhaps a reduction of $25,000,000 annually, a very large sum in power rates. California will receive the benefits, and it will attract, as you have indicated, corporations and business enterprises to southern California, and of course, denude the upper basin States of the possibility, perhaps, of obtaining appropriations or capital for investment in the upper basin States.

Senator HAYDEN. Senator, I cannot agree with your last state-
It will not denude anybody of anything.
Senator KING. It will result in that.

Senator HAYDEN. You cannot benefit any one nook or corner of the United States by cheaper power that you do not benefit the whole United States. I will not concede for a moment that what the Senator has said is a possibility. We in Arizona would benefit, and you in Utah would benefit. Just look at the quantity of our cattle, of our agricultural products that stream continually into coast markets. If cheaper power were to mean a million more people in southern California, that would be just a million more persons to buy the products of our farms and our ranges.

Senator CHAVEZ. I think it will benefit the whole country, but, nevertheless, I want to be frank with the committee also. New Mexico and I say it with due modesty-since I have been in Congress, has gotten water conscious. I do feel the entire people of the State of New Mexico, if they did not get very much out of the compact that was signed, that went to the Senate and legislation was passed therefor, we would at least like to be protected to the extent of our proportionate share.

We want to go along with California, Nevada, Utah, and the rest of the States, but we are poor, we cannot take advantage of these things unless we get some revenue from the whole project. I can readily see that the revenue has got to come from power in southern California.

Senator HAYDEN. I started to say to the Senator that I did not write the bill, and he did not write the bill, and no doubt if he and I had written it, it would have been different. We had something else to do. We were not commissioned by acts of our State legislatures to write the bill; we were not appointed by our governors to write the bill. The legislators of the State of Arizona passed a law saying a commission shall be created, the Governor shall appoint the commissioners, and that commission shall have the power of negotiation. When my State took that action, I said it is acting in its sovereign capacity to arrange an agreement with other States, and I am very happy that it is being done.

Senator CHAVEZ. I feel a little differently. Any time any commission in my State does something that I think will be detrimental to the interests of my State, or the interests I am representing in the Senate, I am certainly not going to follow it.

Senator HAYDEN. Just let me step a little further along. The commissioners met and agreed. Why they put an "and" here or a comma

there, I do not know. I only know that this bill is a final agreement of all the States.

Senator CHAVEZ. Do you think that would be binding on the committee or the Congress?

Senator HAYDEN. The Congress has to enact the legislation, and that is why we are here. I want to state, as I did in the beginning, that when you can find the duly constituted, legally authorized representatives of the seven States, representatives of the power companies, representatives of the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of the Budget, the Treasury Department, the Attorney General, the General Accounting Office, and the House Committee on Irrigation and Recla mation all in agreement, that is a miracle. I feel in that respect that I hate to question miracles. I do not like to examine possible flyspecks on the picture.

Let me suggest this, gentlemen. You are not now questioning the person who knows the most about this bill. May I suggest again that Judge Stone, who has been intimately connected with the drafting of this bill from the day it started, be placed upon the witness stand. I very gladly yield to Judge Stone, Mr. Chairman.

Senator KING. May I make an observation, in view of an apparent misunderstanding of the distinguished Senator from Arizona of the observation which I made. The Upper Basin States, including New Mexico, furnish the water. The Upper Basin States have not derived any advantage from the great advantage that exists in this development. We are glad that California, Arizona, and Nevada are getting some advantages in the bill. We do not object to those advantages. We are glad to see the development in California. It is a great State, and my State has contributed a large number of people there, probably 40,000 or 50,000 in Utah have gone to California to aid in its development; but the point I wanted to make was that the Upper Basin States that furnish the water have gotten no benefits up to date, and this bill ought to, so far as possible, give them some protection. I do not know just how it may be done. If the proposed new compact is strictly interpreted, they might not obtain that protection.

Senator CHAVEZ. That is all we ask.

Senator KING. It is a fact that the development of power in Southern California brings great factories and plants there, and prevents them from being established in the Upper Basin States, because the transmission of power up there would not permit them to get as cheap power in Wyoming, Utah, or Colorado as they get down in Los Angeles.

Senator HAYDEN. Just turn the thing around a little bit. What disadvantage has Arizona, or Nevada, or Utah, or New Mexico, or Colorado, or Wyoming suffered by reason of the construction of Boulder Dam? What harm has come to any State in the basin by reason of this power development in Boulder Dam?

Senator KING. That is not the sole question.

You say you

Senator HAYDEN. I just want to get this idea over. have gained no advantage. Now, where have you been hurt? Let us look at it that way. My contention is that every power right and every water right in this entire basin should be developed. There should be no question about where you start the development of the river, whether on its high tributaries, or on its lower reaches. The

point is that development throughout the basin must be started promptly and carried to completion. In connection with the use of water for irrigation in the upper basin, there is bound to be an incidental development of power, and wherever power is developed, rates for commercial power within reasonable transmission are coming down. With the annual payments proposed for the basin in this bill, the upper basin can find out where projects for water and power development can be located and be feasible from an engineering and an economic standpoint.

Let me suggest that you now hear Judge Stone, who knows more about this in a minute than I do in a month.

Senator PITTMAN. Will you pardon me a minute? I desire to say something on the subject that Senator King has raised. We had to have a certain State pact, the Six States Pact, to build any improvements on the Colorado River by reason of our laws of appropriation, and so we did get together and had a certain State pact, rather a six States pact. Arizona kept out of it, but all of the States with the exception of Arizona entered into the pact. That pact provided for a division of the waters of the Colorado River, a certain amount of it reserved appropriately to the upper States.

Senator KING. Seven million eight hundred thousand acre-feet. Senator PITTMAN. We did bring that about, to protect the proportion of the water of the Colorado River. In fact, the Arizona State Legislature had passed an act to prevent any more water than so much being taken out. The upper States were protected in that, at least they thought they were, because they have entered into the compact. The compact permitted the building of this dam between Nevada and Arizona, and that is the development in the southern basin. It is a matter that I do not think the upper States should have any particular interest in. They have all of their water saved there. Whenever there is a demand for irrigation or power, they have got it. If, for instance, Utah should build a dam somewhere up in Utah, I do not believe that on behalf of Nevada I would urge any part of the proceeds of that dam be devoted to Nevada. Or any dam that produces power in New Mexico, or other States, would make any difference to us. Of course, we did agree, at the time we passed the bill, that part of the proceeds of that dam should go to the upper States in the way of furnishing a fund for surveys and preparation. Unfortunately for the upper States, as it developed, that fund was not available until after the amortization of the dam. There was no provision for any fund going up there until after the amortization. Senator KING. In the bill itself, there is $250,000 provided for the making of surveys in the upper basin States.

Senator HAYDEN. That was appropriated and expended. We did that.

Senator PITTMAN. I am telling you what the bill provided. We all agreed to the bill except Arizona, all the States involved, and it was agreed when the amortization had taken place, then these funds would go in. Of course, when we considered that matter it was too remote to be of any value to Senator King and others who would die before that time, maybe, so in this bill here there is an attempt made to make it practically immediately available.

Senator CHAVEZ. I understand that, Senator.