EDITORIAL ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 SOMETHING'S FISHY ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS As the chorus of criticism rises against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for fudging research data to fatten its budget, some Republican senators are scurrying to protect the Corps from reform. Last week, Republican senators tacked a rider onto a farm budget bill that would build ramparts around the embattled Corps. The rider states that no money could be used to reorganize the Corps. That's both a bad idea and a bad approach to governance. But it's not surprising, considering the cozy relationship the Corps has long enjoyed with some members of Congress -- including our own Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond -- and their pals in the barge and grain business. The current situation the Corps finds itself in is a glaring example of how arrogance and friends in high places can cloud -- even corrupt -- judgment at taxpayers' expense. And it's a good argument for why the Corps needs to distance itself from its buddies. The Corps has come under attack this year for manipulating data in a major, $54 million study of the need for seven new locks and dams on the Mississippi and Illinois rivers. The Corps allegedly inflated transportation costs, the potential export market and the demand for grain shipped by barge in order to justify the billion-dollar lock and dam project. The integrity of the study began to unravel in February, when Donald Sweeney, an economist in the Corps' St. Louis office, said he had been removed from his job after sticking by his finding that barge traffic on the Mississippi River did not warrant the massive project. That prompted Secretary of the Army Louis Caldera to order an investigation of the study. He's also looking into allegations in an internal memo that the Corps was planning a major expansion of its reach and role -- and budget -- without the knowledge of its civilian administrators. In March, Mr. Caldera announced proposed reforms to reassert civilian control over the agency. That sent Mr. Bond, among others, rushing to the Corps' defense. Things have gotten worse from there. Within the last two weeks, a second Corps economist, Richard Manguno, told Senate investigators that he was ordered to alter the formulas used to calculate whether proposed projects were economically justified. Mr. Manguno, a 23-year Corps veteran, has been the lead economist for the study since September of 1998. Then, last week, a group of independent university economists hired to evaluate the Corps' study said it was so unscientific that it couldn't be used to justify expanding just one lock, much less overhauling seven. Last week, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said it intends to file a "jeopardy opinion" with the Corps, criticizing it for river management practices that have put two endangered species in the Mississippi River in greater peril. The species are the pallid sturgeon, a rare fish found in quiet, shallow backwaters, and a freshwater mussel. The Corps management of the river has also been criticized for years by environmental groups. Clearly, something fishy's going on here. And taxpayers -- whether they shed tears over the pallid sturgeon or just hate to see good money flushed down the Mississippi -- are owed an accounting. Good decisions about the environmental and economic risks and benefits of public works projects of this scale can't be based on doctored data and preconceived conclusions. Secretary Caldera should continue -- full steam ahead -- with his investigation. In the meantime, Senate apologists for the Corps should back off. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - For SC email list T-and-C, send: GET TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS.CURRENT to [log in to unmask]