91直播

This聽opinion聽column聽from Arizona聽Chamber of Commerce & Industry President and CEO Danny Seiden聽originally聽appeared in the Yuma Sun.

There鈥檚 been plenty of coverage lately about Arizona preparing to defend its water rights on the Colorado River. And yes, we鈥檝e hired a law firm. Hard to blame us.

What鈥檚 gotten less attention is the other side of this story: what鈥檚 actually happening at the negotiating table. The answer isn鈥檛 complicated. Arizona and other Lower Basin states have put real solutions on the table. Colorado and its Upper Basin partners have not.

Arizona鈥檚 chief water negotiator, ADWR Director Tom Buschatzke, was blunt after collapsed. Despite months of discussions, the Lower Basin states received one consistent message from the Upper Basin: there will be no firm commitment to reduce water use, no matter how bad the hydrology gets or how low the reservoirs fall.

That鈥檚 not a negotiating position. That鈥檚 a refusal to engage.

And the stakes are real. Snowpack across the West is at record lows, with just 2.3 million acre-feet of water expected to reach Lake Powell through July 鈥� about a third of normal. The river is under serious strain, and time is not on our side.

Arizona has responded accordingly. This year alone, we鈥檝e already absorbed more than 500,000 acre-feet in cuts. We鈥檝e invested in conservation, recharge, and long-term infrastructure. These aren鈥檛 easy decisions. They come with real economic tradeoffs.

But that鈥檚 what shared responsibility looks like.

Other Lower Basin states stepped up too. Arizona offered to reduce its allocation by 27%. California offered 10%. Nevada nearly 17%. All of it was rejected by Upper Basin states, with Colorado chief among them. They have continued to insist that additional cuts fall primarily on the Lower Basin.

That鈥檚 not a partner. That鈥檚 a free rider.

And it reflects a broader pattern in how Colorado approaches governing.

Credibility at the negotiating table doesn鈥檛 exist in a vacuum. It鈥檚 built or eroded by whether a state is willing to make hard calls, take responsibility, and lead when it matters. On that front, Colorado鈥檚 track record deserves scrutiny.

Over the past decade, Colorado has enacted more than 10,000 new regulatory mandates. Job growth has slowed dramatically. More residents are leaving the state, and nearly half of its business leaders say they鈥檙e planning to invest elsewhere.

Meanwhile, Arizona has stayed focused on building a competitive, growing economy.

from Common Sense Institute Arizona and the Arizona Chamber Foundation found that if Arizona had followed Colorado鈥檚 policy path, we鈥檇 have 113,000 fewer workers and an economy $18.6 billion smaller.

Arizona made different choices. Those choices are reflected in how we鈥檙e showing up at the Colorado River table today.

None of this is to say Colorado doesn鈥檛 have rights to the river. It does. But rights come with responsibilities, especially when the system is under this level of stress. And especially when you鈥檝e spent years sending the same message: the cuts are someone else鈥檚 problem.

The Colorado River supports 40 million people and an estimated $1.4 trillion in economic activity. A deal matters for Arizona, for the region, and for the country. But a deal that asks Lower Basin states to make deep, binding cuts while Upper Basin states make no firm commitments isn鈥檛 a solution. It鈥檚 an imbalance dressed up as compromise.

Governor Hobbs is right to push back. Arizona is right to keep every option on the table, including legal ones. And anyone who thinks we鈥檙e being unreasonable should read what Arizona鈥檚 negotiator said when the February deadline blew up: we cannot take on the task of saving this river system on our own.

Colorado has already done real damage to its own economy. We can鈥檛 let it drag ours down too. We won鈥檛 keep carrying their water.

Danny Seiden is the president and CEO of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce & Industry.