OCR Text |
Show J5tem Resources Wrap-up uture of Water Resources Council now in question j, Helen Monfx-rtf to Ihe Tim-B- ' Independent) w water projects y built in the Rocky : ".lain w "ntil ',,lft-5 ',,lft-5 ".i" Rep- Jam' P-'.'Vn. P-'.'Vn. R-Colo.. said ' HiHise sustained L'tsidenl veto of the s. "bjUion public works -. bill bv a vote of ;'oo m cvt. 5. K Vf are riht back to : one. There is no f ' to revive those 'eCts killed by the t beat's veto. The leadership really ;,lw bat for us; they " t fought for us. It is 5 C'nri 10 envision their ; up that kind of i:; for us again," 3'3 stated. Heps, frank E. cj.D-Colo., and Gunn ; iTjv, D-l'tah, mem- s: ihe House Appro- -:zs Committer, said ;" ,r expected a continu- . solution would be j5 by Congress con-7 con-7 :jx funding on going .."There's no time ' ris anything else, " , n sited. :i;son predicted a of the projects -z would have been .sins in fiscal 1979 if t i dent's veto had luen overridden will be candidates for deauthor-uation deauthor-uation now that the President's veto has boon sustained by the House. Johnson's point: only election el-ection of a new President in 19S0 will revive them, as Mr. Carter has 'blackballed" 'black-balled" them. Here are the projects att'ected in our area, with the amounts that were provided in the vetoed bill and the reasons given by the Administration for opposing them: Savory-Pot Hook. Colo, and Wyo.. $75,000, on hit list. Fruitland Mesa, Colo., $75,000, on hit list. Narrows, Colo., $1,500,000. on hit list. San Luis Closed Basin. Colo.. $600,000. not ready. Animas-LaPlata, Colo. & N.M.. $500,000, not ready. Uintah. Utah. $2,300.-000, $2,300.-000, not ready. Upalco. Utah. Sl.SOO,-000. Sl.SOO,-000. not ready. All of the projects except Narrows and Closed Clos-ed Basin are in the Upper Colorado River Basin. The funds provided for the Savery and Fruitland projects pro-jects were for planning only. The Colorado River Basin states pulled out all of the stops to try to get the bill passed. Gov. Richard D. Lamm, D-Colo., D-Colo., flew in from Colorado Colo-rado accompanied by Harris Har-ris Sherman, the director of the Colorado Department Depart-ment of Natural Resources, Resourc-es, to buttonhole members mem-bers of the House in the Rayburn room adjoining the House floor on Oct. 4. Later an official of the Water Resources Congress Con-gress told this correspondent corres-pondent he thought the Colorado governor had lined up "five or six votes'" in favor of overriding over-riding the bill. At the same time that Lamm was "working" the House with the assistance of Evans and Rep. Timothy, Tim-othy, E. Wirth, D-Colo., who joined the battle to override the veto, Sen. Gary Hart, D-Colo., was honchoing a meeting of the Western Coalition in the Senate. There were seven Senators at the meeting-Hart, Milton R. Young, R., and Quentin N. Burdick, D., of North Dakota, Malcolm Wallop, R-Wvo., Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, Paul Lixult, D-Nev.. D-Nev.. and Barry C.oldwnt-er, C.oldwnt-er, R-Ariz. Of the seven all but the North Dakota Senators were from Colorado Colo-rado River Basin states. The Senators agreed to work on about 70 House members whose votes were believed to be up for grabs. This can be counterproductive, count-erproductive, as most House members do not want their Senators counseling coun-seling them on how to vote. But the Senators decided to take a chance anyway. Son. Alan Cranston, Cran-ston, D-Calif., was actually actual-ly seen on the House floor before the climactic vote. Cranston was supporting the Congressional leadership leader-ship on override; he is the Senate Democratic whip. When the veto message came in to the House from the President, a few hisses accompanied it from the House members sore about the veto. But is soon became evident that the White House had lined up its ducks in a row well. The President made deals with new Members, talked to Republican Members on the phone for the first time since he had become President, gave a breakfast for 30 Republicans Republi-cans at the White House on Oct. 5, and sent personally written notes to each Member of the House who might be a candidate to vote to sustain the veto. The White House listed three Colorado River Basin gov- ernors as in favor of sustaining the veto: Mike O'Cullnghun, D-Nev., Jerry Jer-ry Apodaca, D-N.M.. and Ed Hersc hler, D-Wyo., all had backed Upper Colorado Colo-rado River Basin development develop-ment in the past, but none was up for re-election, and all are under consideration considera-tion for high federal posts. "It just proves," McKay said philosophically, "that the pocketbook talks." Later there was some confusion, never straightened straight-ened out at this writing, as to whether all three governors did, in fact, favor sustaining the veto. After the Western members interested in the bill had spent a week burning the midnight oil to get the House to override the veto, and had been unsuccessful, House Republican Leader John J. Rhodes, R-Ariz., said, "It just proves what the power of the Presidency can be in a crucial situation. I was ashamed of the House today." he told this correspondent. Rhodes looked worn out. In addition to having to work to override the veto, Rhodes faced division in his own ranks, as Rep. Robert Michel, R-Ill., House Republican whip, broke with Rhodes and led a drive to sustain the veto. On the final tally, 128 Democrats and 62 Republicans Repub-licans voted to sustain the veto, more than needed. -HCM- |