CHANGE OF HEART SEEMS LIKE SOUR GRAPES IN PLANE CONTRACT

The recent decision by Defense Department officials to award a $100 billion contract for the advanced Joint Strike Fighter to either Lockheed-Martin or Boeing was undeniably a major blow to Missouri's largest private employer, St. Louis-based McDonnell-Douglas. Officials at the Missouri aerospace giant had pinned plenty of hopes on being in the running for the huge contract, which calls for production to begin in 2006 and run for years beyond that. It was all the more surprising in that Boeing, principally a builder of commercial aircraft, hasn't built a fighter since the 1930s, while Lockheed has never built one that lands on a carrier.

Developments in the decision's aftermath, stated bluntly, have been bizarre in the extreme. First, the good news. McDonnell executives behaved admirably, taking the disappointing news like men and going on about their business amid speculation that their failure to make this cut may hasten the day when McDonnell hooks up with a partner in some kind of merger deal. McDonnell executives had explored this very possibility with their counterparts at Boeing as recently as last year, before breaking off talks.

Two other developments from key quarters around St. Louis fell far short of the classy response of McDonnell executives. House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt weighed in, wondering aloud whether such an advanced fighter is needed at all, and musing that the money might be better spent on social programs. This might be unremarkable coming from Gephardt except for the fact that he had just spent the better part of two years lobbying Pentagon brass to land the contract for McDonnell. Figuratively speaking, Gephardt may not be the first rejected suitor to take an immediate vow of celibacy. Still, when done in public, immediately after the fact and with no grace to speak of, these things can be extremely painful, even embarrassing, to watch. Charitable observers might chalk it up to post-election fatigue and prescribe a little R&R. It wasn't Dick Gephardt's finest hour.

Every bit as amazing was this week's editorial reaction in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. As a good home-towner, the Post had cheered Gephardt on as he tried to land the huge contract for McDonnell, making all the usual arguments. No sooner had Gephardt unburdened himself of his new line than editorial writers at the Post took up his refrain. Fancifully speculating on a day long hence when the British Navy and the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps may "drop out" of participation in the project, the Post suggested the plane may be too expensive. Next they raised "serious questions as to whether the attempt even needs to be made."

Still, Gephardt's about-face was too much even for his relentless boosters at the Post: "However," they wrote, "Mr. Gephardt's perspective would be more credible had he not led an energetic lobbying campaign to persuade the Pentagon to pick McDonnell to build the very plane he now says may not be needed. If McDonnell-Douglas had been chosen, would Mr. Gephardt be arguing that the plane was not needed?"

Good question. Do you suppose somebody in St. Louis slipped something strange into the water supply up there?