Samaranch Sparkles in Washington

In the first appearance by an International Olympic Committee president before Congress, Juan Antonio Samaranch turned in a virtuoso performance Wednesday that may ultimately be a turning point in public perception of the worst scandal in Olympic history.

Cool and calm, he offered answers for every question lawmakers contentiously zinged his way--even as he asserted that a 50-point package of reforms the IOC endorsed last weekend has made it more open and accountable than ever before.

“I think we’ve cleaned the house, and a fundamental reform package has been adopted,” Samaranch said.

Samaranch’s two-hour appearance--and the possibility he would come off as arrogant--held significant risk for the IOC. A few months ago, Congress was threatening to take a hard look at tax rules allowing deductions for the IOC’s sponsors. Nine of its 11 biggest sponsors are American.

But, in conjunction with testimony later in the day from two respected Washington hands, Samaranch and the IOC may have taken steps toward reclaiming a measure of public goodwill--which its leadership has pleaded for repeatedly in the year since the revelations emerged of Salt Lake City’s scandal-tainted winning bid for the 2002 Winter Games.

Former Sen. Howard Baker (R-Tenn.), who followed Samaranch to the witness stand, testified that he believes the longtime IOC president is “well-meaning” and “fully dedicated” to reform.

And one-time White House chief of staff Ken Duberstein, who played a key role in an inquiry panel that this year criticized the IOC for its tolerance of a “culture of improper gift giving,” said Wednesday that Samaranch is “living [reform] every day.”

Duberstein said the IOC still needs “close monitoring and frequent checkups.” But he also said the IOC’s package of reforms “represents real progress.”

Afterward, Samaranch smiled and said, “I was expecting these questions.”

Samaranch’s performance should have come as no surprise to anyone familiar with the 79-year-old Spaniard, an experienced political operator.

A former diplomat who has served atop the IOC since 1980, Samaranch had postponed his performance before Congress until a time that suited his terms.

He had been been invited to testify in mid-October before the U.S. House Commerce Committee’s subcommittee on oversight and investigations.

In early October, he said he would testify only after the IOC’s general assembly had considered a reform package.

The reforms were proposed by a semi-independent panel called IOC 2000 that included IOC members and personalities from around the world, among them former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

The IOC 2000 package was designed to build on other reforms the IOC instituted this year. Among them: the creation of an ethics commission staffed by, among others, Baker and former United Nations Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar.

Last weekend, meeting in Lausanne, Switzerland, the assembly fully endorsed all 50 points in the IOC 2000 package. It voted for age and term limits, election and reelection procedures, invited 15 athletes to join as members and, most important, banned visits to cities bidding to host the Games.

The visits were at the root of the problem in Salt Lake. Bidders there showered more than $1 million in cash, gifts, scholarships and other inducements on IOC members after inviting them to share Utah’s grand vistas and warm hospitality. The IOC ultimately expelled six members. Four others resigned.

Bidders in Atlanta won the 1996 Summer Games by relying on the same personal approach. The past year has been marked by reports of excess in the Atlanta bid as well. Atlanta officials have acknowledged breaking IOC gift rules but say they did not buy votes.

The reform package passed in Lausanne only after intense lobbying by Samaranch and a cadre of key aides. As Baker pointed out, however, it’s only a first step. He called the ethics commission a “work in progress.”

Nonetheless, Samaranch had something concrete to bring with him to Washington.

After flying in Monday on the Concorde, he spent more than three hours Tuesday prepping for Wednesday’s testimony.

As the hearing began, Samaranch gave an opening statement in English, which is one of several languages he speaks.

When the time came for questions from the committee, however, he responded in his native Spanish. His remarks were then repeated in English by a translator. That gave him crucial time to think as he was peppered with questions.

Lawmakers asked about a trip his wife took in 1990 to Georgia and South Carolina that was paid for by the Atlanta bid committee; about the authority of the ethics commission; about his assertion that he had no hard evidence of corruption until the first reports dribbled out of Salt Lake City last November.

None of it was new territory, and Samaranch repeated answers he has given many times. “She was invited,” he said of his wife’s trip. “They felt they should defray costs.”

Samaranch did give ground on two ambiguities.

Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) asked why cities bidding for the Games were still allowed to make even “nominal” gifts to IOC members. Samaranch replied that it would be fine to change the rule to make it clear all gifts are banned. But, he insisted, “the problem has [already] completely disappeared--no visits, no gifts.”

Rep. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said he was concerned about a clause in the IOC 2000 package that would seemingly still allow visits because it proclaims visits are “not necessary.” Samaranch agreed: “I think we drafted it incorrectly. The decision was to ban visits on both sides.”

For the most part, however, lawmakers largely spared Samaranch tougher questioning.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), who had suggested in his opening remarks that Samaranch resign, didn’t mention it in his direct questioning. Instead, he used much of his time to ask Samaranch whether he keeps clothing, family photos and “hygiene supplies” in the two-room hotel suite, paid for by the IOC, that serves as Samaranch’s home base in Lausanne, Switzerland.

Lawmakers also showed repeatedly that they were unfamiliar with the nuances of Olympic culture, repeatedly botching the pronunciation of powerful IOC member Keba Mbaye of Senegal and relying for the most part on press reports instead of source documents.

DeGette, for instance, referred to the “ ’92 Nagano Games.” The Winter Olympics held in Nagano, Japan, took place in 1998.

And, with the television cameras rolling, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Los Angeles) chose to use a portion of his time to lobby for U.S. campaign finance reform--tying it back to the IOC by saying the IOC’s ways reminded him of another system that was also “broken and needs to be changed.”

For the most part, however, Waxman focused on another topic familiar to Olympic observers: NBC’s long-term TV deal with the IOC, worth $3.5 billion through 2008. In a series of sharp questions, he suggested it had been hammered out in 1995 in exchange for a contribution for one of Samaranch’s pet projects, the Olympic Museum in Lausanne.

Not so, Samaranch said.

Not so, NBC Sports Chairman Dick Ebersol said afterward in the hallway. There was no linkage, Ebersol said.

Afterward, Dick Pound of Canada, an IOC vice president, said of lawmakers: “I think most of them missed an opportunity to deal with things that matter.”

Late Wednesday, meantime, it was disclosed that Waxman’s office had issued a “certificate of appreciation” to South Korean IOC delegate Kim Un Yong--just weeks after Kim had received a stern reprimand from the IOC for his role in the Salt Lake scandal.

The “World Cultural and Sports Foundation” in Los Angeles had requested the certificates on June 14 on behalf of Kim and four others, and Waxman’s Los Angeles office sent it out shortly thereafter as a “routine matter,” said the congressman’s chief of staff, Phil Schiliro.

Schiliro said Waxman has never met Kim.

“We had no knowledge [Kim] was associated with the Olympic committee,” Schiliro said. “It’s coincidence.”