S
605
N3
1937
PROCEEDINGS
of
Sixth Annual Convention
National Reclamation
Association
held at
CASPER,
WYOMING
October 12, 13 and 14, 1937
Store the Water and
Save the Land
NATIONAL RECLAMATION ASSOCIATION
975 National Press Bldg. Washington, D. C.0. S. WARDEN.
PRESIDENT
F. 0. HAGIE.
SECRETARY-MANAGER
The reclamation and settlement of the arid lands will enrich every portion of our country.
—Message of President Theodore Roosevelt to the Congress, 1902.
The more we study the water resources of the nation, the more we accept the fact that their use is a matter of national concern and that our plans for their use—our line of thinking—must include great regions as well as narrower localities.
—President Franklin D. Roosevelt speaking at Bonneville, Washington, 1937.
The National Reclamation Association
ANNUAL CONVENTION S ES s IONSat the
THE MASONIC TEMPLE, CASPER. WYOMING
October
12 to 14, 1937
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12
Registration of Delegates-8:30 A. M. to 1:30 I'. M., Masonic Temple.
10:30 A. M. State Caucuses to select: 1. Director for each state.
2. Member of Legislative Committee. 3. Member of Resolutions Committee 4. Members of Ways and Means Committee.
AFTERNOON SESSION
Meeting called to order by President 0. S. Warden, at 1:30. Mr. Warden: This is the sixth annual convention of the Na-tional Reclamation Association. The fourteen members of the board of directors are all in Casper at the present moment, and it has been most pleasant to have meetings of the board during the last two days with every member present. I am much gratified also to welcome representatives from all of the states included in the membership of the association. I am not entirely sure, but I believe every state is going to be represented at this convention.
In accordance with our usual custom we shall open the conven-tion with the invocaconven-tion by Rev. E. Lee Neal, pastor of the First Christian church of Casper.
(Invocation by Rev. E. Lee Neal.)
Mr. Warden: The National Reclamation Association owes a great deal to the governors of the various states. We should always keep in mind that the cradle of the association was rocked in the governor's seat in the state of Utah. Governor Dern, I believe, was the chief executive of Utah when a group of governors met and recognized the great need of the west, and this association had its birth.
This large assemblage here today is one of the results of that meeting, so I think we are wise if we listen to the governors, and that is what we are going to do now.
ADDRESS OF WELCOME By Governor Leslie A. Miller of Wyoming
Mr. President, governors, members of the association, ladies and gentlemen: The president stated that it was a pleasure to meet here with the governors of the various states, and I want to say that it is a very great pleasure indeed for the governor of Wyoming to welcome the delegates to this convention. It is plain to me now, as I look over this audience, that you are here with serious purpose in mind, that this is a meeting fraught with much significance, and because it is an important meeting I am doubly glad that you found it convenient to meet in our state.
Wyoming, I think, is unique in its position as a place for the holding of a meeting of this kind. I am going to illustrate what I mean by directing your attention for a moment to a map which I brought along from my office. Those of you who reside in Wyoming are familiar, of course, with the fact that waters have their source in Wyoming to flow in several different directions. Wyoming perhaps is the only state of all this western country which provides water for the Pacific, water for the Gulf of California, water for tfie Gulf of Mexico, and water indirectly for the Atlantic ocean.
The Snake river, which, as you know, is the chief tributary of the Columbia river, rises in Wyoming, just south of Yellowstone park, and flows across Idaho to join the Columbia river, which empties into the Pacific ocean. The Green river, which is the chief tributary of the Colorado river, emptying into the Gulf of California, rises in west central Wyoming and flows south. It is only a compara-tively short distance from the headwaters of the Green river to the headwaters of the Snake river. The real beginning of the Missouri river is the Madison river, which rises in Yellowstone park on the north boundary of our state, and one of the chief tributaries of the Missouri is the Yellowstone, which heads a little south and east of the corner of Yellowstone park, and flows up into Montana. The Big Horn river, which rises just a few miles north of the Wyoming-Montana line, is also one of the chief tributaries of the Missouri river and the Platte river. The North Platte river rises on the south boundary of Wyoming, flows through what we know as the Kendrick project, thence east to the Missouri river, and the chief tributary of the North Platte river is the Laramie river, rising close to the state line, and flowing across the Laramie plains, this water going down to the Missouri river, thence down the Mississippi to the Gulf
of
Mexico. That is why I say that Wyoming occupies a rather unique position as a place in which to hold a meeting to discuss reclamation waters.
All of these waters are very vital to this state, and vital 10 the west as a whole. I think that in Wyoming we have a rather lively appreciation of the fact that without the right to use the waters
or
our lakes and our streams we would have no western country, because this is an arid country, and in the greater part of the territory of these eleven western states there is an insufficient amount of rainfall to provide for the growing of crops. Therefore,
when we discuss matters having to do with the storage and distribu tion of water we are discussing, perhaps, the most vital thing in our existence in this western country. I could occupy a great deal of time stating some of the platitudes with regard to water as an asset in the west, but if I did so I should only be repeating what you have heard many, many times, and in an address of welcome one is not expected to take a great deal of time.
I am quite sure from a study of your program and a glance over the makeup of this audience that you have many able speakers upon the subjects with which you have to deal in this convention ; more speakers, perhaps, or more willing speakers, shall we say, than you would have time to listen to. Upon looking at the counte-nances of a good many of my auditors I am reminded ()1 something Will Rogers said at a meeting I attended one time. Ile said he had always wondered why men joined the democratic party, until he was invited to participate in a democratic meeting at Washington, and when he went to the Mayflower hotel, where the meeting was to be held, he discovered why. Ile said there was a line of speakers from the Mayflower hotel down to the Potomac river, and he decided that they joined the democratic party to have an opportunity to make a speech. I don't know how many of you gentlemen joined this reclamation association to make speeches, but I console all of you with this thought, that this meeting extends for two and a half days, there is a banquet and a luncheon in contemplation, so there ought to be an opportunity for a good many of you to talk if you have something to say about water and its application to the land.
In any case 1 do welcome you here on behalf of the state of Wyoming. As I said at the outset, Wyoming is vitally interested in the problems you will discuss here, and I believe this is the proper time for me to state publicly the appreciation of our state for the investigations that are being conducted now by our bureau of rec-lamation. Certain studies are being made on some of our watersheds which will indicate intelligently the use that can be made in Wyoming of these waters which rise within our state. We have been teaching for some time the principle that the most economical and the most efficient storage of water is that which is undertaken near the headwaters of a stream, and Wyoming having within its borders so many origins of streams we feel that the storage of water within our state is very vital, not only to Wyoming kit to many of our sister and neighboring states.
You will today and for the next couple of days discuss this matter of the storage of water, and its application to lands subject to irrigation, and you could not discuss a matter of more interest in this state, or in the entire west, and so I extend the heartiest kind of welcome from people who are interested in what you may do and what you may say here.
I wish for the meeting every possible success, of course, and I hope your deliberations will be harmonious, and that when all of you return to your homes you will feel that it has been the most
profitable meeting of the National Reclamation Association since its birth.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Warden : Governor Miller, I am sure the association wishes to thank you for your most illuminating picture of the situation in this part of the country. As I stated yesterday, we Montana people should like to see you keep all the water you can use in Wyoming, and we will take what comes along to us.
Governor Miller has indicated that perhaps there are a good many would-be orators in the democratic party. I am a democrat, but I wish to say that in this convention a republican orator will be just as welcome as a democratic orator.
We have a double privilege today, because we are to listen to another governor, or one who was formerly the chief executive of this state. It is an equal pleasure to present former Governor B. B. Brooks of Wyoming.
ADDRESS BY HON. B. B. BROOKS of Casper, Wyoming
Mr. President, and gentlemen: Governor Miller has pressed the welcome of the state of Wyoming to the group assembled here, and it is my privilege and pleasure to say just a word of welcome on behalf of our city of Casper.
I thought Governor Miller's opening remarks in calling atten-ton to Wyoming being a sort of backbone of America, and furnishing water to irrigate the fertile soil and reclaim the arid lands of sur-rounding states, were very apropos, but I thought when he was referring to the map he might have mentioned just one other point. If you will glance at the map you will notice that the state of Wyoming is the squarest state in the union, and Casper is one of the squarest towns in the state. However, actions speak louder than words, and I hope that before this convention adjourns the arrange-ments made by the committees in charge of the various activities will be satisfactory to you, and that when you complete your labors here you may return safely to your homes feeling that Casper and Wyoming both did all they could to make this meeting the great success it deserves to be.
I want to say one word for the city of Casper, which has quite a remarkable background. The early Mormon pioneers were really the first settlers of Wyoming, and they established the first ferry to assist the people in crossing the Platte river, at the place which later became known as Platte Bridge station, about a mile west of Casper, and they also irrigated Deer creek, east of here; when I first went on that creek trapping beaver fifty-seven years ago, the old Mormon ditches were plainly discernible all along the stream. They were the pioneers of western civilization. They set an example for successful farming and irrigation that has been one of the most inspiring things in the development of our arid states that could be imagined.
The historical background of Casper, following that first ferry established by the Mormons, includes the famous Indian fight in which Col. Caspar Collins lost his life in endeavoring to relieve a train of government troops, some twenty-five or more, who were bringing some wagons from the station at Independence Rock. Caspar Collins in that fight was turned back with his troops, and might have ridden to safety had it not been for one of his companions, who was wounded and said, "For Heav'ns sake don't leave me," and Caspar Collins lost his life because he would not forsake a fellow being. There is something about that story that it seems to me should be an inspiration to the people of Casper, and I think every community should have some history of a heroic deed to give it an inspiration. Perhaps before this convention adjourns you may absorb a little of that old spirit of service of helpfulness to your fellowmen.
I understand that all of you are invited to take a trip this afternoon to the Casper-Alcova project, now the Kendrick project. They may possibly pass by old Fort Casper, which has been restored; it is just about a mile out of town, and almost on your route to
Alcova.
I am going to conclude this talk by mentioning a name that is worth remembering. I am glad that the Alcova project is being renamed the "Kendrick project." John B. Kendrick was one of Wyoming's remarkable men—he and I punched cows together in the early days, and I was very fond of him. He also made a great senator, but there was another man whom I want to mention, also a very dear friend of mine, a man who did more, perhaps, than any other one man to lay a real foundation for irrigation. He was instru-mental in framing the irrigation laws that now operate in this state, and he was not only a great man for Wyoming, but he was after-wards a great man for California, and for some four years be was a great leader of irrigation in Australia. He lost his arm while in the service of his country in Washington, accidentally, of course, and he died well along in years, but still carrying on for irrigation, and if Wyoming had no other contribution to make to the real service of irrigation than the development made through the efforts of Elwood Mead, it should be proud.
I assure you that Wyoming and Casper both welcome you most heartily, and wish you every success, for no work that I know of in this great arid west is more important than that upon which you are embarked. When I came to Wyoming first this was the great American desert, and look at it now! I know of nothing that will last through the ages as will the effects of irrigation, the trans-formation of the sagebrush covered west, the prairie surrounded towns, into beautiful and productive areas. I know of nothing more worth while, and I assure you that your efforts will be appre-ciated, not only by Wyoming but by all of the western arid states.
We welcome you to Casper.
Mr. Warden: I am sure you agree with me that through the practical remarks of Governor Miler and the historical allusions of Governor Brooks, we have had a most pleasant welcome.
At this time I observe that the lieutenant governor of Idaho is in the audience. Will you not come up and join these governors on the platform?
I have just been informed that the Honorable T. A. Walters, first assistant to the secretary of the interior, will arrive in Casper on the four o'clock train, and I am much gratified to have this information. I should like to appoint a committee to meet Secretary Walters at the train, if that should be within your pleasure. that committee might be headed by our first vice president, Mr. Roland Harwell, and I shall add to it Mr. John Price, and Mr. W. F. Wilker-son of Casper, who are delegated to meet the secretary at the four o'clock train.
The only way this association can ever avoid listening to the president's annual address is by taking some action to abolish it from the program.
I have tried in this paper to present the reclamation picture as I see it, and if you will have patience enough to listen through I hope you may obtain some information from it.
As I registered this morning, and looked at the appendage at-tached to the badge, I suppose this is water in the bottle, I did not sample it, but as I looked at the appendage to the badge I thought we might make the slogan of this convention "Store the water and save the land."
(The president thereupon read his annual report to the con-vention, which reads as follows) :
ADDRESS OF PRESIDENT 0. S. WARDEN
The fourteen western states that have membership in the National Reclamation Association make a big ranch. There are six hundred million acres of land in this wide and deep western country—one-third of the area of continental United States—a group of states as large as an eastern section from the Atlantic ocean to the Ohio river. The other day I pulled histories down from the shelves to rediscover how Uncle Sam acquired the territory we are now trying to make fit for homes and cities. It is an interesting invest-ment story.
The early presidents began to buy large chunks of land, adding to the territory acquired from Great Britain by treaty to the close of the Revolutionary war. President Jefferson, a firm believer in the value of land, took fifteen million dollars from the federal treasury and gave it to Napoleon for the so-called Louisiana pur-chase. In that area there was included North Dakota, Nebraska and parts of Montana, Wyoming and Colorado, west of the Rockies. By discovery and settlement three hundred thousand square miles were acquired within the present states of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, western Montana and Wyoming. Texas seceded from Mexico. After the war with Mexico, the U. S. A. augmented its western domain by more than five hundred thousand square miles in New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah and Colorado. There was a cash item in the deal at the end of the trouble with our
neighbor to the south of fifteen million dollars. Through the Gadsden purchase a few years later we were able to buy a part of southern Arizona and New Mexico for ten million dollars. To summarize— Uncle Sam purchased a vast western empire at a cash cost of forty million dollars.
If you care to make up a purely western balance sheet, you may reckon how much of the Louisiana purchase budget should go over against parts of Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, western :Min-nesota and South Dakota. Subtract that sum from the fifteen million dollars that Mr. Jefferson gave to Napoleon for the whole tract. There is only one point to this historic land review. Were these early day purchases worth while? Let the 1937 taxable valuations in the fourteen states that belong to our organization answer the question. Observe that the government, after these many years, owns 52 per cent of this land in the west. The problem of the moment, then, is what more shall we do about this land—what are the potential values of the west unrealized? The answer, in a word, is— recla mation.
The reclamation story, as you know, begins with the Spanish missionaries in California and Arizona. The Mormons assisted agriculture by the diversion of water to the land. There has now been invested in the irrigation of western lands more than a billion dollars. One-fourth of this sum has been advanced by the federal government—three-fourths is the investment of private capital. We have learned much by experience. Former President Theodore Roosevelt was the father of reclamation. If President Franklin D. Roosevelt. and all presidents to come, will stand upon the platform that was written into the 1902 message which persuaded the congress to establish the bureau of reclamation, the west will be satisfied. In thirty-six years there has been no need to change the declaration of Theodore Roosevelt who sent these prophetic words to the congress:
-The reclamation and settlement of the arid lands will enrich every portion of our country."
This, my friends, is the 1937 formula of the National Reclama-tion AssociaReclama-tion. At the opening of the sixth annual convenReclama-tion we cling to the self-same fundamental pronouncement. Five years ago a group of western governors met and rocked the cradle of this organization. That was a good day for reclamation. We do not need to change the principles of our constitution. The veterans of rec-lamation declared that the purvoses of this association are to promote the cause of reclamation:---to cooperate with and assist the federal bureau of reclamation in bringing about a speedy completion of projects—to urge the adoption of desirable federal legislation. These have been and are the unchanging rules of the National Rec-lamation Association. There have been, and always will be, dif-fering opinions about the merit of this or that project. or the desirable appropriations of a particular session of the congress. These recurring circumstances, however, should not and must not— if we are to continually succeed—prevent a united support of the combined judgment of the bureau of reclamation and the National
Reclamation Association, supporting a selective group of expendi-tures at any particular time. It is as clear as the sun at noonday that the association, through its Washington office and elsewhere, must always support an arranged group of projects, if it is
to
do or progressively accomplish anything at all. If the states fall apart because of differing ambitions the organized cause cannot win. You well know that nearly all legislation in a representative government comes out of compromise by persons or by groups. The lessons of give and take, and a united push, are as old as the written pages of history. Let me add a remark—the fourteen states of this organ-ization will win their way if, one and all, they continue to pull upon the same rope. So much about fundamentals.I must not abuse your patience with fulsome history. You know the record. The thirty-five years of government leadership, and our five years of associated push, reveal a self-evident national accomplishment. The building of sixty-eight dams and reservoirs— the irrigation of millions of acres—a million self-sustaining homes —a billion of new taxable wealth—the building of power plants that have aided construction, contributed to maintenance and helped to stabilize the business of reclamation—this much has come to pass in a brief span of years. It is the inspiration of our cause—the rainbow that illumines the reclamation sky of today.
Have you seen Boulder dam? I think it is the wonder of the age. Shall we call it the eighth wonder of the world? The seven that have been recorded in history are perhaps as spectacular, but they have had no such measure of usefulness. Boulder dam, spread-ing fanlike, makes secure the livspread-ing of many people who dwell in the lower half of the inter-mountain west. The engineering design, the solid concrete, the super-power machinery, unite in a manifold utility, a mind-impressing accomplishment that has not been sur-passed in our day—the waters of a great river controlled and directed into a multiple civic and industrial usefulness for people at the river bank and hundreds of miles away. Flood control— irrigation—domestic water supply—power—here is an inspiring exhibit of what we can do with other rivers—the Missouri, the Yellowstone, the Sacramento, the San Joaquin, the Columbia— many more. The utility and national benefit of Boulder dant can be achieved at other places. Earning revenues will pay the whole cost.
Further, and within your pleasure, I would like to review what the National Reclamation Association has been doing during an active year. There was a generous attendance at the Spokane con-vention in November, 1936. There was nearly a unanimous judgment that the association should have an executive secretary, and an office in Washington to work for reclamation within the limitations of proven merit. There were, however, differences of opinion. The delegates had to catch trains to be at home for Thanksgiving day. The convention adjourned. The treasurer had neither an approved budget nor money. For the moment this plight seemed serious. The spirit of reclamation, however, did not hesitate. There was a conference. An appointed volunteer committee provided a balanced
budget and money so that we were soon on the way. Many of you have been advised and are therefore familiar with the work of the Washington office. May I express—not a boastful—but a deliberate opinion—I think the National Reclamation Association has rendered the country—the whole country—a more valuable service in the year 1937 than any like civic organization—east or west.
In January, 1937, when the seventy-fifth congress began its session, and the usual interior appropriations came into the picture, there was clearly in evidence the old-time group determination— first, to severely cut the reclamation money, and second, to prevent the investigation, survey or building of new projects. It was the same ill-considered and misinformed antagonism of a number of eastern congressmen who have continually insisted, regardless of contrary proof, that a national reclamation policy is not in keeping with really progressive agriculture throughout the whole country. This contention the Washington office tackled at once. There was continued diligent research. The findings were highly informative. You have read many of the items in the bulletins issued from Washington.
I believe great gains have been made in the attitude of many fair-minded congressmen, as well as in the congressional committee situation. Through convincing research, it has been revealed that we buy more than we sell—much more—that the reclamation states have not, do not and never will produce agricultural commodities, such as are grown more naturally in the southern and eastern sections, sufficient to injure national agriculture. The reclamation states are not contributors to surplus crops, or to a depression of prices in agricultural commodities. On the other hand, by creating a market for the products of other states, a stabilizing influence is contributed to the national agricultural situation. The truth is —we of the west are great contributors to merchandising and fab-rication that comes out of eastern trade centers and factories. Investigation of what the reclamation states buy in textiles, to-bacco, corn and hog products, automobiles, insurance premiums and many other lines, tells the same story. In the building of Boulder dam and Grand Coulee, 65% of the construction costs go to eastern fabricating points. As the first session of the seventy-fifth congress passes into history, I would say we have many new friends in the house of representatives who understand the objectives of reclama-tion—who are ready to defend and support progressive reclamation. This has been and is the legislative battleground. The senate has supported practical and economic reclamation in the seventy-fifth congress, and in the one before.
At this point in the review perhaps someone will ask the question—if he is not fully informed—what about the federal money now available? To my mind, the appropriations of the seventy-fifth congress for construction just ahead should be reckoned as a satis-factory outcome. The allotments measure up liberally, I think, to the expectations of the bureau of reclamation and this association. The interior appropriation bill provided more than forty-one and a half million dollars to the reclamation bureau, for twenty-three
projects, in twelve states, and more than three million three huhdred thousand dollars for Indian bureau projects. I did not expect more —I really did not expect as much. Add to these sums the unexpended balances re-appropriated and the amount available for buildihg in the fiscal year 1938 reaches about a hundred and fifteen million dollars. There was contest over these unexpended balances. The conclusion was a reclamation victory.
The Borah-Hatch bill, plus the White measure, came th4ough the legislative mill as a compromise enactment. It ends a general moratorium and provides for a commission to study repayment plans—to delay payments where there is an established need—a measure that should have been passed by the seventy-fourth congress. It had become quite evident that a continued general moratorium
would destroy the present reclamation plan. What we clearly need is an adapted, flexible repayment statute, fair to each water -user, from the beginning to the end of his purchase contract, within a reasonably measured ability to pay. The commission provided in the Borah-Hatch bill can render a great service. The O'Mahoney-Greever bill, to enable the construction of small dams and reservoirs passed the congress and was signed by the president. The deficiency bill, however, did not appropriate. There is further consideration required if we are to try out this method of reclamation. You are familiar with the Bone-Schwellenbach bill to prevent speculation in Columbia basin lands, the soil conservation act, and the farm tenancy measure, enacted in accord with the resolutions approved by the Spokane convention of this association. The WPA, involving some projects where local funds are available, was extended two years.
Speaking inclusively, in no session that I can recall has there been more satisfactory reclamation legislation: In comparison with one year ago, I feel like saying—we have come out of the uncertain murky shadows of an early morning into the clear sunlight of a new day.
I hope the convening delegates share in some measure the present day optimism of these annual remarks, but I urge as well that you study the reclamation problems still unsolved—those just ahead, and others not far around the corner. Every year introduces diversity into research and operation—how to use all the water with an evenly measured benefit, sectional, regional and national—how to restore and build sheltering forests—how to search out supple-mentary water supply for existing irrigation--how to apply the benefits of drainage—how to preserve equities as we use power to assist reclamation—how to reestablish and largely increase revolving fund revenues so that there may be uniform progress in every water shed of each reclamation state. These problems are pressing for solution—they are not even around the corner.
I can only take time further to express a few opinions. The demand for supplementary water is as insistent as it was a year ago. This increasing need is even subtracting from the impetus for new construction. The forests have much to do with water supply. A few days ago I was driving along an important northwestern
mountain stream. A restoration of the forest in that watershed would, I think, double the stream flow of the river. In this western country I would put every CCC camp planting trees, and keep them at it. Restore the forests and the supplementary water supply question will be one-half satisfied.
The government has 23 power plants in its reclamation setup on 12 projects, not including Boulder dam. The power developed has been used to aid irrigation. It has enabled the feasibility of projects. There has been varied and interesting experience from the first installation on the Salt river project in Arizona to the great Boulder dam with its multiple operation. Power is now and then regarded as a touchy subject. Nevertheless, it is and will remain a by-product in reclamation. There will be more installations at Grand coulee, on the Central valley project of California, perhaps at Fort Peck, and at other places. So there is little use in running away from the subject. Whatever this association may do or say, it should keep within the pertinent issues that pertain to reclamation, and the adequacy of legislation that shall operate in fairness to all interests and agencies that can and are willing to render useful public service.
There are advocates of a natural resources board. There are those who would have more regional authorities. In connection with these proposals, great issues are involved. The government already has operating agencies of proven ability. I am of the opinion that some sort of regional authorities could be established through legislative enactment, in fairness to all interests and agencies— including private invested capital—but it is an open question whether we are smart enough to do it. One thing is sure—time is lost if you are listening to the fellow who thinks he has mastered all the wisdom that we may wisely use in the development of our natural resources. There is one sure conclusion—this year of 1937 is a time for careful and thoughtful consideration. It is not a time for too hasty acceptance of personal conclusions.
The government is building several big emergency irrigation projects. It should eventually get back, in addition to many smaller projects, to canyon and mountain storage—to a uniform distribution of benefits. This means that we may wisely return to an old-fashioned revolving fund with adequate revenue. Where can we get such funds? This convention may properly try to answer the question.
There have been suggestions for new revenue of various sorts, coming from the natural resources of the west—revenues resting upon advances justified by expectation of repayment or upon development contributing to the general welfare of the nation. Because of our oil conservation policy, and diminishing land sales, revenues for the reclamation revolving fund have been dwindling away. From naval oil leases there has come into the general treasury forty or fifty million dollars. From private oil leases an equal amount has been paid into the reclamation fund. As a matter of revenue principle, the naval oil lease proceeds, as well as those from private oil leases, are contributed by a western resource
and may rightfully be used for western development. This divei6ion, if corrected, would yield approximately thirty million dollars. Furthermore, it is, or will be, a fairly conceived policy, at any time, if any reserved natural resource of the west is made the basis for advances to the reclamation revolving fund under a proper re-imbursable plan. The profits of Boulder dam, if present earning schedules are maintained, might be used for the benefit of designated areas of the Colorado river basin under the law. Repayments from the so-called emergency projects may have like consideration. The former source might ultimately be quite helpful—the latter, after a while. It will be some years before there will be any considerable comeback from such projects as Grand coulee or the Central valley of California, but there will be earlier returns from smaller projects. I am merely trying to open the revenue subject—to urge upon you the need for revenue research and subsequent legislative enactment, if the revolving fund, as originally conceived, is to remain the foundation upon which we are to build the future reclamation structure and carry on the conservation of the natural resources of the west.
While we advocate reclamation as a sound national policy, it is quite clear that we are coining to a stage of progressive accom-plishment when the states can help themselves with their own money. At the September session of the Federal Irrigation Congress at Caldwell, Idaho, Commissioner of Reclamation Page compli-mented my home state, Montana, on having gone further than any other commonwealth in spending state funds for participation in a reclamation program. The story, concisely told, has a common interest.
The Montana legislature, in special session in December and January 1933-1934 enacted a comprehensive water conservation law. Two legislatures have appropriated $1,330,000 for a revolving fund, including operation of the department. In cooperation with the public works administration, eleven projects are either on the way or are completed, at a cost of four million dollars, and with a benefit to two hundred thousand acres of land. Further public works allot-ments were made a few weeks ago to five other projects—to benefit seventy thousand acres of land, at an expenditure cost of something more than $1,500,000. One other project has been approved by all public works agencies, and is awaiting the allotment of money. The estimated cost would be a million and a quarter—the irrigation of forty thousand acres of land would be accomplished. The state of Montana has also entered upon a cooperative plan with the WPA. Work has already been done on nearly one hundred small projects. An arrangement has recenty been perfected with the WPA, insuring a governmental expenditure of $136,000 per month for ten months. The state contributes $10,000 per month. Montana feels that there has been a distinct accomplishment in this state participation. Any western state can do likewise.
Now I am sure you are ready to hear the end of these remarks. You will join with me in a reassuring satisfaction because reclama-tion has been a successful enterprise for thirty-five years. No other
western business has met its obligations as well—in the repayment of construction costs—meeting the obligations of operation, main-tenance and water rentals. As this annual convention begins its work, I am firm in a renewing confidence that reclamation can make a new west—a bountiful dwelling place—using the natural resources of pioneer empire. Prosperity for a new generation will be measured in a well-directed effort—a forceful government leadership, an increasing state contribution—the support of contented people who use the water. The National Reclamation Association, I ant sure, can help in a manifold service. I have the faith that there will appear a continually broadening opportunity. Ultimately, reclama-tion will take its rightful place in a nareclama-tional public works program. President Roosevelt spoke to the point on his recent western trip. I felt a great confidence and a new enthusiasm as I read the news reports. Let me recall what the president said:
At Cheyenne: I am very firmly convinced that the people of the nation have more and more a national point of view. I believe it will be written in history as a great accomplishment of these years we are living in now—the welding together of the people of the United States.
At Casper: We are not only acting, but thinking, in national terms.
At Bonneville: The more we study the water resources of the nation, the more we accept the fact that their use is a matter of national concern and that our plans for their use—our line of thinking —must include great regions as well as narrower localities. At Fort Peck: We are going to do many things for the preserva-tion of water in the dry area. We are going to take people off poor land and put them on good land.
This has been the reclamation doctrine from Theodore Roosevelt to Franklin D. Roosevelt. This will be the catechism as we go on. The forests, the water and the land are the resources of the nation that last forever in every state—east and west. The control of flood waters, the storage and use of water to assist production— is a challenge to business, to the states, and to the national govern-.ment. If our natural resources really become a national problem, in just a little while there will be a greater western America—this land that we purchased for a song.
A Voice: Mr. President, may I ask the unanimous consent of -those present to address the convention?
Mr. Warden: You may have that privilege if no one objects to it.
Mr. Fauver : Mr. President, distinguished guests '
and members of the association: When the National Reclamation Association was organized a few years ago very few, if any of us, had any realization of the part it could and would play in developing the west and pointing the way to national well-being by the conservation of our national resources. The address we have just heard summarizes the growth and the solid accomplishments in the direction of the objec-tives of this association in a way which cannot but imbue us with pride at what has been done, and broaden our vision as to the
Possibilities of the future. The National Reclamation Association has more than justified the purpose of its organization and the faith of its founders, and a very great deal of the credit is due to the president who has guided this association for the past two years. He has given unsparingly of his time and his energy, and his money, without thought of recompense, in forwarding the work of the association, and in building it to its present strength.
The only way we can really show our appreciation of his efforts and his sacrifice, and the way he would wish us to show it, is for us to go forward united and in continued support of the aims and and objectives of the association; yet it surely is fitting and proper to express our appreciation of his leadership, and the wise authority he has exercised, in some way which will be a permanent evidence of the grateful esteem in which he is held by the members of this association.
It has occurred to some of us that a fitting symbol in that regard would be a gavel emblematic of the authority and leadership, and embracing in it something typical of the meaning and necessity for the National Reclamation Association. Accordingly, such a gavel has been designed, the main body of which is of orange wood from a tree which grew to maturity in a California orange grove only to wither and die for lack of water. 'Within the past two years a great reclamation project has been initiated in that same territory, which upon completion will save the surrounding groves and will again make the land which produced this wood fruitful. The inlaid buttons in the gavel represent the permanency of our natural resources which we hope to conserve through the efforts of this association, and they are made of wood taken from one of the giant redwoods of the Sequoia national park, which is about three thousand years old, and still is as strong and vigorous as it was a thousand years ago. The handle is made from the wood of the valley oak, which trees are disappearing because of falling water levels in their native habitat. They will once again flourish when sufficient water is made available; therefore the handle of this gavel is symbolic both of the disaster which follows the waste of our natural resources, and the restoration of the same through well planned irrigation projects.
In the name of this association I present this gavel to our president in grateful tribute to his splendid service in the great cause of reclamation, and as an expression of our esteem and our continued loyalty to the great work he has carried on. (Applause.) Mr. Warden: Mr. Fauver, I surely cannot begin to use this gavel by calling you to order, but I am wondering what I can say. When a surprise of this sort overtakes one it is rather difficult to command language to express the appreciation that my be felt at the moment. I think I can take time to say only the old-fashioned "thank you," and to say that I shall keep this gavel as a most pleasant reminder of the association, and if the Angel Gabriel should undertake to call me out of this world before I think he should I shall pound with this gavel in an endeavor to stop him, and 1 will
remain with you as long as I can, working for the cause of reclamation. (Applause.)
A Voice: Mr. Warden, would you hold up that gavel so we can all see it.
(President Warden complied with this request, amid a round of applause.)
Mr. Warden: Gentlemen, since you have passed through the ordeal of listening to the president's annual address I now have some good news for you.
The people of the state of South Dakota have concluded that they would like to come in and become a part of this National Reclamation Association. We have their application before us; perhaps the secretary will read it to you.
(The secretary thereupon read the application of South Dakota for affiliation with the National Reclamation Association.)
Mr. Warden: They having made their formal application, and being represented by five or six gentlemen at this time, I think if you are inclined to accept their application you should act upon it at once, so that they may immediately become a part of this convention.
What is your pleasure, gentlemen?
A Voice: Mr. Chairman, I move that we accept the State of South Dakota as a member of this association, welcome them, and their delegates, and their cooperation, and assure them that we will do as much for them as we have done for the other states who were originally members of this association.
(Motion duly seconded, and upon being put to a vote was unanimously carried.)
Mr. Warden: The state of South Dakota is now a duly elected member of the National Reclamation Association. I should like to have the representatives of South Dakota stand, if they will.
(The members of the South Dakota delegation thereupon arose to their feet, and were given a hearty round of applause.)
Mr. Warden: There was an expressed opinion at the Spokane convention that some of our business was unnecessarily delayed until the latter part of the convention. We wish to avoid that criti-cism in this convention, and we have arranged at the very first session to take up the unfinished and new business that may per-tain to the conduct of the association's affairs.
The first of these matters is a report brought in at the Spokane convention last year referring to the board of directors the matter of an amendment to the constitution, and the second concerns certain changes in the constitution that have been suggested by the board of directors during their session of the last two days, by way of modification, so that conflicts may be eliminated.
I recognize Judge Sawyer, of Oregon, who will make the report. Mr. Sawyer: Mr. President, Governor Miller, Governor Clark, Governor Brooks: As Mr. Warden has just stated, at the Spokane meeting last year there was referred to the board of directors an amendment proposed to section 5 of the constitution. The direction to the board of directors was that it bring in a specific and definite
amendment to the constitution, and the board has completed the preparation of that amendment, which has been presented to the various state caucuses at their meetings this morning, together with three other amendments, one supplementing it, and two others, all tending to clarify, as Mr. Warden has said, the procedure of the association.
I shall read these four proposed amendments to the constitu-tion, and move their adopconstitu-tion, after which I suppose the procedure will be to have reports from the caucuses held this morning, pre-senting the votes there taken.
Mr. Sawyer thereupon read the proposed amendments, which were as follows:
Amendment No. 1.
That section 5 of the constitution be amended in such manner that it shall read as follows:
"The annual meeting of the association shall be held in the autumn of each year, at a time and place to be selected at the preceding annual meeting, or by the board of directors, call for same to be issued over the joint signatures of the president and the secretary. The annual meeting shall be by convention made up of delegates from the various states in which there is located a federal irrigation project. Delegates to any meeting shall be appointed by the governors of the member states from lists of nominees submitted by the members of the association, and presented to the governor of each state by the director for that state, and in event of failure of the governor to so appoint not less than ten days prior to the meeting, selections shall be made from the list of nominees by the director for that state. Questions before the annual meetings of the association, if in controversy, shall be determined by majority vote, each state represented being allowed ten votes."
Amendment No. 2.
That section 8 of the constitution be amended in such manner that it shall read as follows:
"Funds for the activities of the association shall be provided by the contributions solicited by the officers, the board of direc-ors, the budget and finance committee, the affiliated state organizations and members of responsible representatives of the association appointed by the president. Annual member-ship fees shall be as follows: Individual contributing, $1.00; individual sustaining, $5.00; and organization, $5.00 or more.
Amendment No. 3.
That section 9 of the constitution be amended by striking the words "at least one-half" and substituting the words "being allowed ten votes," so that it shall read as follows:
"Amendments to the constitution may be made at any regu-lar or special meeting by the affirmative vote of a majority of the member states, each state having ten votes."
Amendment No. 4.
That paragraphs a, b and c of section 12 of the constitution be amended in such manner that they shall read as follows:
"a. On the first day of each annual meeting the president shall appoint, subject to nomination of one member for the committee by and from each delegation, a committee on resolu-tions and a committee on legislation. The president shall desig-nate one member of each committee as its chairman. He shall also appoint a budget and finance committee of five members. It shall be the duty of each committee to report as part of the proceedings of each annual meeting of the association, such reports being subject to the approval of the qualified delegates. "b. The budget and finance committee shall prepare and submit at each annual meeting the financial program of the association for the coming year.
"c. The committee on legislation shall cooperate in securing the enactment of legislation proposed by the association for enactment by the congress of the United States, or the legisla-tures of the several states represented in the National Reclama-tion AssociaReclama-tion."
Mr. Sawyer: Mr. President, I move the adoption of these amendments to the constitution as read:
(Motion seconded.)
Mr. Bannister of Colorado: I move to amend sub-section, b of amendment 4.
Mr. Warden: Will you please give us your amendment in writing?
Mr. Bannister: The amendment will read as follows, or the b sub-section:
"The budget and finance committee shall prepare and submit (amendment by adding the words 'to the board of directors before') each annual meeting the financial program of the association for the coming year."
Mr. Sawyer: If I may take half a minute in explanation, the purpose of the amendment was that the committee of five who have arranged and prepared a budget shall present the same to the board of directors, consisting of one member from each state, who would more fully understand the conditions of each state, its ability to pay, and from what source it could obtain its money, for final dis-posal before the body. I think it is not necessary for me to explain further than that.
Mr. Warden: Of course the budget for the ensuing year will be presented here a little later on in this program, coming from the board of directors. Is that the way you desire to have it submitted? Mr. Bannister: I wish to have it mandatory on the budget com-mittee to submit its report to the board of directors for its approval, before bringing it to the convention as a whole.
Mr. Sawyer: May I comment on the gentleman's proposal? The intention of the board of directors in preparing this amendment
certainly was that any budget arrived at by such committee ishould first be presented to the board. The board had no thought whatever that the committee would be appointed to first report to the associa-tion without an opportunity being offered to the director from each state to do the very thing that you desire done.
Mr. Bannister: We should like to make it mandatory.
Mr. Sawyer: I believe that is in the hands of the president—he certainly can call on his committees to bring in their reportsi,as he wishes them to be brought in. The only reason I am urging the adoption of the amendment as it stands now is because a somewhat confused situation may develop, I believe, in parliamentary practice, if we try to amend this, and necessarily it. would, I believe, have to go back to a state caucus, the caucuses having already passed on the proposed amendment to the constitution as read.
Mr. Mathers of Nebraska: I arise to a point of order. I do not believe it is proper to vote on four constitutional amendments at once.
Mr. Rogers of Colorado: I arise to a point of order. Did I under-stand this gentleman to say that it is necessary to refer this matter back to a caucus of the various states before we can adopt the amendments here?
Mr. Sawyer: That is my impression. I refer to the proposed amendment made by the gentleman Irvin Colorado.
Mr. Rogers: Cannot this body now in session adopt or change the constitution without the necessity of referring the matter back to the state caucuses?
Mr. Warden: The constitution provides that votes shall be taken by the states, each state having one vote.
Mr. Rogers: That is prior to the adoption of proposed amend-ment No. 3, is not that correct?
Mr. Lampert: I move as a substitsute for all matters now before us that we act on these amendments by action on the amendments one at a time as presented.
(Motion seconded.)
Mr. Warden: Are you ready for the question? Voices: Question. Question.
(Upon being put to a vote the last motion was carried unani-mously.)
Mr. Warden: Perhaps, Judge Sawyer, you would make a motion for the adoption of the amendments one at a time.
Mr. Sawyer: Mr. Rogers, do you wish them to be read again? Mr. Rogers. No.
Mr. Sawyer: Then, Mr. President, I move that section 5 of the constitution be amended by amendment as read.
(Motion seconded.)
Mr. Warden: Judge Sawyer says we must vote by states, and I think he is correct. We shall therefore call the roll of states, and the state delegations will vote for their respective states. I believe most of the states have caucused on these amendments, so you will know how to vote.
The secretary thereupon called the roll of states, with the following result:
Arizona - Aye North Dakota - Aye California Aye Oregon - Aye Colorado - Aye South I )a kota - Aye Idaho - Aye Texas - Aye Montana - Ave Utah - - Ave Nebraska Aye Washington - Aye Nevada - Aye Wyoming - - Aye New Mexico Aye
has
Mr. Hagie : Unanimous. Mr. Warden: The amendment been duly carried.
Mr. Sawyer: Mr. President, I move that the amendment to sec-tion 8 of the constitusec-tion, being amendment No. 2, be adopted as read.
(Motion seconded.)
The secretary called the roll of states with the following results: North Dakota Oregon -South Dakota Texas -Utah - -Washington Wyoming -Arizona -California lolorado -I daho Montana -Nebraska Nevada -New Mexico Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye
to section 5 of the constitution
Aye Aye Aye Ave Aye Aye Aye Mr. Warden: Amendment No. 2, amending section 8 of the con-stitution, is duly adopted.
Mr. Corlett of Colorado: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the Colo-rado caucus I wish to offer a motion to amend proposed amendment No. 3, amending section 9, by striking from the proposed amend-ment the words "or special."
Mr. Warden: I do not believe we can proceed in that way. The constitution requires that we vote by states.
Mr. Corlett: We will vote by states.
I should like to say, if I may be permitted to do so, that our delegation feels that unless the words "or special" can be stricken out we must submit an alternative plan to provide for the submission of any proposed amendment to the constitution in written form at a special meeting prior to the meeting at which it is to be acted upon, so that it may be considered and we may have notice of the proposed amendment. These meetings are often held at a great distance, and it is difficult for us to attend some of the special meetings, and yet we should like to know if amendments are to be considered at special meetings.
Mr. Warden: It would be a special meeting of the whole mem-bership.
Mr. Corlett: I appreciate that, but it may be for a special pur-pose.
Mr. Warden: I do not see how under the constitution Vire can vote on amendments to amendments. If this proposal is not approved any other proposal may then be in order.
Mr. Mathers : I arise to a point of order. Does the constitution prohibit the offering of amendments.
Mr. Warden: The constitution provides how we must vote. Mr. Mathers : This is not a question of voting. This is a question of whether or not the proposed amendment shall be amended, and the gentleman has suggested that the proposed amendment shall be amended by omitting the words "or special." The point of order is whether or not that may be accepted by the chair and voted on by this convention. It is not a question of how the vote shall be taken, but of whether you shall accept or reject the proposed amendment to the amendment now before the house. That is the point of order we want decided.
Mr. Warden: The difficulty in the situation is how the voting is to be done on the amendment. I have no objection at all to sub-mitting the amendment to a vote.
Mr. Sawyer: May I point out that the words "or special" to which you object are already in the constitution, and that the wording that is in this amendment does not affect those former words in any manner—we have made no change whatever. The constitution originally provided for that very thing.
Mr. Rogers: The point I should like to make is that by adopting this amendment you would strike those words "or special," prohibit-ing the consideration of an amendment except at a regular meetprohibit-ing, and you could then vote on your original amendment as amended. Mr. Warden: I think your point of order is well taken, if the voting is done by states, and in that case we shall submit the amendment to the amendment as proposed, and the vote is to be taken by states. In other words, you will indicate by states whether or not you wish to vote in favor of the amendment to the amendment proposed by the board of directors.
Mr. Phillips: A point of order. This same thing no doubt will come up over and over again. The states, as I take it, have not had an opportunity to caucus on this particular amendment. It may be that there will be ten delegates representing some given state, and two delegates will want to vote for the amendment and eight against it, or vice versa. What provision is there for the states to split their votes?
Mr. Warden: There is no provision to split the vote of a state. Mr. Phillips: Each delegation has appointed a man to speak for that state, but the appointed representative has not had instruc-tions on this question or other quesinstruc-tions yet to come up. Suppose the delegation should be divided among themselves?
Mr. Warden: You may vote by fractions if you wish to.
Mr. Phillips: In other words, if the spokesman for the state does not vote in harmony with the views of some one in a distant part of the room, that individual may arise and take off his fraction, is that it?
Mr. Smith: We gave each state ten votes. Mr. Warden: That has not been passed on yet.
Mr. Smith: Yes, I think we just passed on it. We can let our spokesman do just as he pleases, and if we don't like it we can arise and do some more voting.
Mr. Bundy: Mr. Chairman, if it is not exactly clear I think it is implied that if in your state caucus or among your ten votes there is a divergence of opinion, the representative casting the vote has a right to cast the votes for and against, according to the caucus.
Mr. Warden: I call your attention to the fact that amendment No. 3 has not been acted upon, and that is the one that changes the number of votes from one to ten.
Mr. Smith: No, amendment No. 1 also changes it, and we have adopted that. The very last words of amendment No. 1.
Mr. Warden: Section 9 is still in the constitution. Does that answer your question?
Mr. Bannister: It seems to me, as the gentleman has said, that we have already adopted amendment No. 1, so that each state now has ten votes. That being true, we are proceeding to vote on amend-ment No. 3, unless we are to take the verdict of the committee that prepared these amendments without exception.
Mr. Corlett of our state has a motion to amend the amendment as offered, so that the constitution could not be amended except at a regular meeting, and that seems to be the wiser course, and upon that amendment that he has offered to amendment No. 3 I take it that each state is entitled to ten votes, and that the spokesman for each state will announce the votes for his state.
Voices: Question. Question.
Mr. Smth : In that event, I believe, to vote properly you would almost have to caucus, would you not?
Mr. Warden: I should think so.
Mr. Rising: May I suggest that the convention chairman in the absence of a parliamentary rule announce the rule to be for the spokesman for each delegation to cast the vote for that delegation, and that if other members of the delegation object to it the votes be counted at the time they are announced. That way we may get through here some time.
May I say while on my feet that the old venerable white-haired Shepherd of Idaho is our spokesman, and will announce for our delegation.
Mr. Farmer: May I ask who should be the spokesman for the different states? This is just for information.
Mr. Warden: I suppose the chairman of your caucus, or the secretary.
We shall now vote on the amendment by states. Those favoring the amendment will vote "Aye," and those not favoring the amend-ment will vote "No."
Mr. Hagen: Mr. Chairman, is it the amendment to the amend-ment that we are voting first?
Mr. Warden: Yes, the amendment to the amendment. 21
The secretary thereupon called the roll of the states, with the following result:
Arizona Aye North Dakota Aye
California Aye Oregon - - Aye
Colorado - Aye South Dakota No
Idaho Aye Texas - Aye
Montana - Passed Utah - - Aye
Nebraska - Aye Washington Ayp
Nevada - Aye Wyoming Aye
New MexicQ - - Aye
Mr. Hagie : Fourteen states voting, all "Aye" except one. Mr. Warden: That carries the amendment to amendment No. 3, as I understand it.
Gentlemen, the amendment to amendment No. 3 having been carried, we shall vote on the proposed amendment No. 3 of Judge Sawyer, as amended.
Voices: Question.
Mr. Warden: Secretary, call the roll of states.
The secretary thereupon called the roll of states, with the following result:
Arizona Aye North Dakota Aye
California Aye Oregon - - Aye
Colorado Aye South Dakota No
Idaho Aye Texas - Aye
Montana - Aye Utah - - Aye
Nebraska Aye Washington Aye
Nevada - Aye Wyoming Aye
New Mexico - Aye
Mr. Hagie : Fifteen states voting, fourteen voting "Aye," one Mr. Warden: Amendment No. 3 as amended, amending section 9 of the constitution, is adopted.
(Amendment No. 3, as amended, reads as follows:
"Amendments to the constitution may be made at any regular meeting by the affirmative vote of a majority of the member states, each having ten votes."
Mr. Sawyer: I move the adoption of amendment No. 4 as here-tofore read.
Mr. Corlett: I hate to make too many amendments, but the delegation from Colorado is in doubt as to the exact meaning of this amendment, and they propose some clarification by way of punctuation, and I should like to move an amendment to proposed amendment 4, amending sub-section c of section 12 of the constitu-tion, so as to place a comma after the word "association" in the second line, and a comma after the word "enactment" in the second line, followed by the figure "1" in parenthesis; that a semi-colon be placed after the words "United States" in the third line, and a comma after the word "or," followed by the figure "2" in paren-thesis, so as to make it read as follows:
"The committee on legislation shall cooperate in securing the enactment of legislation proposed by the association, for enact-ment (1) by the Congress of the United States; or (2), the leg-islatures of the several states represented in the National Recla-mation Association."
And that, if you please, Mr. Chairman, is for the purpose of eliminating any question of the legislative committee being bound or obligated to further legislation proposed by any single state.
Mr. Chambers of Nebraska: I arise to a point of order. We are upon the consideration of sub-section a at this time, as I under-stand it.
Mr. Warden: The motion was for all three sub-sections. If any amendments to amendment 4 are to be offered they will have to be offered now.
Mr. Chambers: The gentleman from Colorado has referred only to sub-section c, I should like to offer an amendment to sub-section a. Mr. Warden: You may propose an amendment to the amend-ment in a matter of this kind.
Mr. Rogers: In further explanation, supplementing the remarks of Mr. Corlett, the Colorado delegation agree that sub-section c should be amended as indicated.
It seems that it is not clear, and what we wish is that only such legislation shall be sponsored as is proposed by the association. As it reads now there may be some question, and under our pro-posed amendment the legislative committee will cooperate in secur-ing the enactment of legislation which is proposed by the associa-tion. The way it reads there may be some question about it, and we are suggesting that this punctuation be put in there to make it clear that only legislation sponsored by the association itself shall be given consideration by the legislative committee.
Mr. Warden: We shall now vote on the amendment of section c of amendment No. 4.
The secretary called the roll of states, with the following result:
Arizona - Aye North Dakota Aye
California Passed Oregon - - No
Colorado Aye South Dakota No
Idaho Aye Texas - Aye
Montana - Aye Utah - - Aye
Nebraska - Aye Washington Aye
Nevada - Aye Wyoming Aye
New Mexico Aye
Mr. Hagie : Fourteen states voting, twelve voting "Aye," two Mr. Warden: Sub-section c of amendment No. 4, amending sec-tion 12 of the constitusec-tion, is adopted as amended.
Are there any further amendments?
Mr. Chambers: Mr. Chairman, the Nebraska delegation pro-poses the following amendment in section a, line 3: after the word "resolution" the insertion of a comma, and the words budget and
finance committee," with another comma, and in line 7, after the word "auditing," the striking of the words "and he shall appoint a budget and finance committee of five members."
I propose that as an amendment for the reason that it leaves the three committees as they are now, and does not provide for the appointment of a budget and finance committee which may repre-sent only a few of the states. In other words, it would leave the same number of members on the budget and finance committee as there are on the other two committees.
(Motion seconded.)
Mr. Warden: Will you kindly give us the text of your amend-ment? Will you please give us your amendment in writing ?
Mr. Bundy: While he is writing out the amendment which is now before us I should like to air my views on it.
While I have not been with the board of directors and I do not know just what may have been running through their minds, as I read sub-division a it provides for the reduction of committees to be appointed by the delegates at large. In other words, as the organization stood heretofore there was a sort of ways and means committee that never did a damn thing, and this proposed amend-ment provides for a legislative committee and a resolution com-mittee which must be appointed by the chairman at the opening of the meeting upon recommendation from the various delegates, cre-ating your large cross-section committees to function on these mat-ters. The amendment offered by Mr. Sawyer provides for the desig-nation of an entirely separate and distinct budget and finance committee of five, which does not come from the delegation but is selected by the chairman, and I am rather inclined to oppose amend-ment to sub-section a, because I believe that such a large finance committee will be altogether unwieldly. The proper functioning of the finance committee does require that it be composed of a few good substantial men selected by the chairman, rather than a wild harum-scarum scheme.
Mr. Hagen: I for one, as an individual delegate, want to second what that man has said. Certainly we must elect a president as we have been doing, in whom we have faith, and certainly we must have committees of a size that can function efficiently.
Mr. Chambers: Are you folks willing to allow Nebraska in on a basis which she can come in, or would you rather have her I urn her back? The state of Nebraska is a small state so far as irri-gation is concerned, and has only a small finger in the pot, but they feel that they should be given representation on the finance committee. One state may want to raise money in one way, another state in another way, and if you have a fair representation on this committee you probably will have some chance of obtaining some cooperation.
For that reason the Nebraska delegation favors this change, they feel that it would be only fifteen members, and that Nebraska should certainly have a representative on that committee. North
Dakota, South Dakota, and New Mexico are among the smaller states and I don't believe that we had better close the door in their faces.
I might say that Nebraska has received something like seventy million dollars under the P. W. A., but as far as reclamation proj-ects are concerned our door is closed to further development by the Federal Reclamation department, because of a law that we have on our statute books, which does away with joint liability. There is no man in Nebraska today who will submit himself to joint liability, and Wyoming and Montana have much the same law.
Mr. Hagen: He is not presenting matters concerning the amend-ment.
Mr. Phillips: I believe a gentleman from Utah is going to pro-pose an amendment to sub-section b of the amendment which will provide, if I understand him correctly, that the budget and finance committee shall report to the board of directors prior to reporting to the annual meeting. Inasmuch as Nebraska will be represented on the board of directors as ably as any other state in the associa-tion I am wondering if the amendment suggested by the gentleman from Utah, if voted on first, would not be acceptable to Nebraska, and if they would then withdraw their amendment to section a of amendment 4.
Mr. Sawyer : Mr. President, I wonder if Mr. Mathers will yield to Mr. Phillips' suggestion?
Mr. Mathers : On behalf of Nebraska, and Mr. Chambers, who tells me that Mr. Phillips will make a substitute motion in order to get it before the house, I suggest that if any amendments are to be offered to sub-section b they be made now, so that sub-section b may be adopted as amended, and I think that will satisfy Nebraska.
Mr. Warden: It is not in order to make an amendment to an amendment.
Mr. Chambers: I will withdraw that amendment.
Mr. Bannister: The very purpose of the amendment that I propose, amending sub-section b of amendment 4, is to accomplish the very objective that Nebraska desires, and yet retain the bene-fits of a small committee, as the gentleman ahead of me mentioned, that might be designed by the chairman to devise ways and means of raising money. There will be a representation of the various states on the board of directors, and my proposed amendment would make it mandatory that the budget be approved by the board of directors, which I understand is the desired objective in this case, that it be mandatory, giving the board an opportunity to approve it before presenting it to the house as a whole.
I therefore, Mr. President, move to amend section b of amend-ment 4 so that-it will read:
"The budget and finance committee shall prepare and submit to the board of directors before each annual meeting the finan-cial program of the association."
You will note that I have added the words, "to the board of directors before," and stricken the word "at."
(Motion seconded.)
