We’ve carried the water. It’s time Colorado carries its weight.

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

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

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

Arizona’s chief water negotiator, ADWR Director Tom Buschatzke, was blunt after February’s deadline 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’s not a negotiating position. That’s 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 — 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’ve already absorbed more than 500,000 acre-feet in cuts. We’ve invested in conservation, recharge, and long-term infrastructure. These aren’t easy decisions. They come with real economic tradeoffs.

But that’s 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’s not a partner. That’s a free rider.

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

Credibility at the negotiating table doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It’s built or eroded by whether a state is willing to make hard calls, take responsibility, and lead when it matters. On that front, Colorado’s 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’re planning to invest elsewhere.

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

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

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

None of this is to say Colorado doesn’t 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’ve spent years sending the same message: the cuts are someone else’s 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’t a solution. It’s 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’re being unreasonable should read what Arizona’s 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’t let it drag ours down too. We won’t keep carrying their water.

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