Water is the lifeblood of the American Southwest. Since the turn of the century, the growth of the West has depended on water supplied by federal projects such as dams, canals, and aqueducts. California's Imperial Valley, perhaps the richest agricultural area per acre in the world, was created and continues to depend on transported water. Today the Southwest's most valuable resource is being misused and wasted even as experts warn of impending and chronic water shortages. California's supply of water is estimated to fall well short of its need. The same is true for most other southwestern states. Cities, farms, heavy industry, mines, electric power stations, and parks and other recreation facilities all compete for a limited amount of water. Moreover, by law (and historical accident) these various users pay sharply different prices for government-supplied water. Los Angeles residents pay in excess of $250 per acre foot (the quantity of water needed to cover an acre a foot deep), whereas farmers in many regions pay no more than $10 per acre foot. Many chemical companies, desperate for water, cannot acquire sufficient amounts at any price. Yet there is waste amid shortage. Farmers use open-ditch irrigation methods and cultivate low-value, water-intensive crops. Homeowners douse their already emerald lawns with water. Industry fails to take full advantage of recycling waste water. Swimming pools and golf courses continue to proliferate. Not surprisingly, water users continue to demand that government provide an ever-increasing supply of cheap water. In a time of budget deficits, should the federal government continue to build expensive new dams, canals, and other water projects and charge the Southwest subsidized (below full cost) prices for water? Are there better economic solutions to the region's dual problems of waste and shortage?