ERNEST A. ENGELBERT*
No aspect of federalism is currently being subjected to more intensive public
inquiry and appraisal than the intergovernmental relationships of water resources
development. The rights and responsibilities of the federal government vis-a-vis
the states in this area have become a subject of increasing political and administrative
controversy ever since World War II. The warm debates over Hell’s Canyon,
Dinosaur National Monument, and the Dixon-Yates contract in the recent presidential
campaign remind us how prominently matters of this kind have become
major issues of public policy. Similarly, a review of federal and state-sponsored
studies within the last decade shows that there have been more major investigations of
various phases of water resources than of any other domestic function.’
To a great degree, recent public interest in this area stems from the major demands
that a growing economy, a rising standard of living, and an intensified national
defense have placed upon the nation’s water resources. Ever-widening concern with
the organization and operation of water resources programs, however, must also
be associated with the re-evaluation of our federal system of government which is
currently taking place. The centralizing influences of technology and communications
and two decades of unprecedented national government growth during depression
and war are forcing a sober reappraisal of the role of the states and local
governments in our national system.
In no other arena are the complex aspects of federalism so starkly presented as in
water resources. Their development epitomizes, perhaps better than any other function,
the need for intergovernmental cooperation. Moreover, there are few functions
in which programs for improvement can so quickly produce changes in the physical
and social environment and in the character of government. Whether we turn to the wording of the latest political party platforms or to more scholarly studies, the
significance of water resources development for our political system of federalism is
greatly evident.
It would be an exaggeration to say that our federal system has now reached the
political crossroads with respect to water resources programs and that no further
large-scale development will occur until present federal-state controversies are resolved.
The imperatives of water needs for a growing national economy will inevitably
push developments forward, whether or not the political logic and institutions have
been suffciently formulated to guide the courses of action. But it is also significant
that, as a nation, we are currently doing much soul-searching to find suitable alternatives
to undue control and domination of resources developments by the federal
government on the one hand, or to the weak and inadequate programs of the states
on the other. We are less confident about solutions for this problem then we were
in the 193o’s. Today, fewer writings are found to the effect that the states are outmoded
as agencies for water resources development or that the nation’s salvation rests
in more Tennessee Valley Authorities. Instead, the need for devising water resources
programs that will strengthen the over-all political structure is recognized.
Within this setting, it is the object of this paper (i) to review briefly the relative
positions of the federal government and the states for water resources development;
(2) to evaluate some of the intergovernmental relationships in this field; and (3) to
explore some courses of action which would strengthen, in particular, the role of the
states.
to read full article please click on
/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/Federalism%20and%20Water%20Resources%20Development.pdf
^
ERNEST A. ENGELBERT*
No aspect of federalism is currently being subjected to more intensive public
inquiry and appraisal than the intergovernmental relationships of water resources
development. The rights and responsibilities of the federal government vis-a-vis
the states in this area have become a subject of increasing political and administrative
controversy ever since World War II. The warm debates over Hell’s Canyon,
Dinosaur National Monument, and the Dixon-Yates contract in the recent presidential
campaign remind us how prominently matters of this kind have become
major issues of public policy. Similarly, a review of federal and state-sponsored
studies within the last decade shows that there have been more major investigations of
various phases of water resources than of any other domestic function.’
To a great degree, recent public interest in this area stems from the major demands
that a growing economy, a rising standard of living, and an intensified national
defense have placed upon the nation’s water resources. Ever-widening concern with
the organization and operation of water resources programs, however, must also
be associated with the re-evaluation of our federal system of government which is
currently taking place. The centralizing influences of technology and communications
and two decades of unprecedented national government growth during depression
and war are forcing a sober reappraisal of the role of the states and local
governments in our national system.
In no other arena are the complex aspects of federalism so starkly presented as in
water resources. Their development epitomizes, perhaps better than any other function,
the need for intergovernmental cooperation. Moreover, there are few functions
in which programs for improvement can so quickly produce changes in the physical
and social environment and in the character of government. Whether we turn to the wording of the latest political party platforms or to more scholarly studies, the
significance of water resources development for our political system of federalism is
greatly evident.
It would be an exaggeration to say that our federal system has now reached the
political crossroads with respect to water resources programs and that no further
large-scale development will occur until present federal-state controversies are resolved.
The imperatives of water needs for a growing national economy will inevitably
push developments forward, whether or not the political logic and institutions have
been suffciently formulated to guide the courses of action. But it is also significant
that, as a nation, we are currently doing much soul-searching to find suitable alternatives
to undue control and domination of resources developments by the federal
government on the one hand, or to the weak and inadequate programs of the states
on the other. We are less confident about solutions for this problem then we were
in the 193o’s. Today, fewer writings are found to the effect that the states are outmoded
as agencies for water resources development or that the nation’s salvation rests
in more Tennessee Valley Authorities. Instead, the need for devising water resources
programs that will strengthen the over-all political structure is recognized.
Within this setting, it is the object of this paper (i) to review briefly the relative
positions of the federal government and the states for water resources development;
(2) to evaluate some of the intergovernmental relationships in this field; and (3) to
explore some courses of action which would strengthen, in particular, the role of the
states.
to read full article please click on
/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/Federalism%20and%20Water%20Resources%20Development.pdf
^
