U.S. Sen. Coburn, R-Oklahoma, can’t be criticized for questioning the value of some stimulus projects, but he should have his facts correct.

Coburn, who often questions government spending, released earlier this month his list of the worst 100 projects from the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, including two projects supposedly scheduled for completion here in his home state.

However, the White House said about one-third of Coburn’s claims were false or misleading. Oklahomans also countered some of Coburn’s wasteful claims.

For instance, Coburn’s report said that a $1 million guard rail along a highway in the Panhandle was a waste because it was meant to protect motorists from going off a roadway and dropping into a reservoir. The reservoir, though, never filled as planned and is “all but useless to potential visitors,” Coburn’s report states.

But the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers points out the highway is more than 100 feet above the surrounding land, the road is used by area motorists and the current guard rail is substandard. The Corps also said it had dropped the project and was considering alternatives.

On the other project, a wastewater treatment plant in Perkins, everyone seems to be partly wrong.

According to Coburn’s report, because the town received $1.5 million in stimulus money, the town must comply with federal restrictions, increasing costs from $5.26 million to $7.2 million, and increasing utility rates.

The White House said increases were not due to the federal government, but the state oversaw the construction of the plant. A state official replied other factors drove up costs.

According to a Perkins official in a May news story, though, the stimulus money did drive up some costs because it requires use of American-made materials and workers are paid based on a prevailing wage survey. That was a requirement of the reinvestment act, which seeks to stimulate local economies.

But some of the increased cost and utility increase was due to the nearly $6 million loan Perkins received from the state for the project.

All public projects need reviewing from design to final construction stage so that public money is spent wisely. Financial prudence and accountability should accompany each step.

Using the projects to make political points, though, can lead to oversimplification and misleading statements. The point is we need smarter choices, greater accountability and less politics from everyone.