Evening star., 1951-08-12
The 'TideIonds' Issue

There is reason to doubt that the Senate
will 60 along with the so-called tidelands bill
that the House has enacted by vote of
265 to 100. In any event, If it ever reaches the
President in its present form, the bil-spon-
Sored by Democratic Representative Walter of
Pennsylvania-isA almost certain to suffer the
same fate as similar legislation in the past. That
is to say, 1t will be vetoed, and the chances of
overriding the veto will be slim at best.
All this is fairly predctable because the
bill is wide open to challenge on the ground that
1t is far too sweeping in the way 1t would quit
claim Federal rights to oil and gas deposits with
in the "Seaward boundaries" of the coastal
States. Although it's critics have resorted to
grossly exaggerated attacks on it, it falls con-
siderably short of offering good compromise
settlement of the highly complicated issues in
volved in this ong-standing Federal-State dis
pute over ownership and control of the vast
mineral wealth in the submerged lands off our
Shores particularly of Louisiana, Texas and
California
The Supreme Court in its historic decisions
of 1947 and 1850, has affirmed that the Federal
Government has paramount" rights to the re-
sources of the coastal lands beyond the inland
waters of the States. What still remains to be
determined, however, is the precise dividing line
between those rights and the States interests
Accordingly, in an effort to settle the question,
the Walter bill provides that everything within
the "seaward boundaries" of the States should
be regarded as belonging to the States. Gener-
ally speaking the boundaries would be those
claimed by the States at the time of their entry
into the Union. In most cases, the line would
be three miles from the States coast line, though
for Texas in keeping with the treaty ratified
when it Joined the Nation, the distance would be
los miles
For the sake of settling the dispute, the
Federal Government might we'll agree to this
provision of the Walter bill If the provision
itself were definite and final Unfortunately
however, the bill declares that any State, If it
can get the approval of Congress- may in the
future extend its seaward boundary beyond three
geographical miles. or beyond los miles in the
case OF Texas. In other words the legislation,
far from putting an end to the issue, would en-
courage the States to expand their claims in
the years ahead and engage in recurrent legal
controversy with the Federal Government. More
over, it would entitle thenl-especially louisiana
Texas and California-to 3712 per cent of all the
royalties and other proceeds earned from the
development of oil and gas deposits in the sub
merged lands recognized as belonging to the
whole Nation not merely to few States
If Congress would enact legislation definitely
suggested by the Walter bill (but without that
bills loophole for expansionist claims in the
future) and if the revenue from the continental
shelf beyond those boundaries were earmarked
in the law for the entire Nation without big
special handouts to small minority of priv
teged States, there would be little reason for
presidential veto. At any rate, such a measure
which would uphold States rights, but still
recognize Federal paramountcy over submerged
lands containing perhaps 10 or 80 per cent of our
offshore wealth-would serve the interests of
the country as whole more effectively than
the one approved by the House.
AS matters stand today, the offshore wealth
is not being developed or exploited. This is so
because the oil companies-as result of the
Supreme Courts decisions-have been enjoined
from doing anything about it until the Federal
Government and the States agree upon firm
deimitation of their clashing claims. 1t is Ger
tainly to the interests of all parties concerned
not least the American people-that Congress
should legislate a compromise settlement less
vulnerable to veto than the Walter BILL