Bloomberg Dreams of Olympic Glory

More than anything else in the whole world, it seems, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg wants the Olympic Games here in 2012. An enormous amount of effort has been made toward what once seemed a somewhat quixotic goal: bringing the Olympic Games to a country that has hosted it twice in the last 10 years and to a city that recently experienced a catastrophic terrorist attack.

A preliminary ranking done by the International Olympic Committee last May placed New York fourth out of the five finalist cities, which include London, Paris, Madrid, and Moscow (yes, strangely enough, this is a very Western-centric group).

A week after an Olympic delegation toured New York for four days, chatter says that New York is catching up—though Paris, by most accounts, remains the frontrunner. The 117 members of the IOC will make the decision of where to hold the 2012 Olympics in July of this year. If one city does not win a majority of votes on the first ballot, the lowest-finishing city will be eliminated; this same procedure will continue until a city wins a majority of the votes. NYC2012’s organizers hope to pick up votes after the first ballot, when European cities, knowing that they will have less of a chance to host the Olympics themselves down the road if Paris, London, or Madrid get the Olympics for 2012, might shy away from those cities to vote in favor of New York.

This has become a major issue for Bloomberg, who follows the gospel of economic development with evangelical fervor. Of course, a mayor might want the Olympics for several reasons, like attracting prestige for his city or creating a legacy for himself. But another reason for having the Olympics factors in for Bloomberg, maybe one that ranks even higher: hosting means that the city must spend a lot of money on shiny new buildings.

In fact, just saying that you want to host the Olympics can mean a lot of money for shiny new buildings: just look at the new football stadium proposed for the New York Jets on the West Side.

Bloomberg has said for a long time that the deal, which is bad for just about everybody except the owner of the Jets (Woody Johnson, a prominent Republican donor), should be finished before the IOC votes. The proposed stadium would host the opening ceremonies, making it the centerpiece of New York’s offering. Of course, if a contract is signed with the Jets to build the stadium before July and the IOC votes to give the Olympics to another city, the city and state governments would be stuck spending $600 million on a stadium that would host eight football games a year.

With that said, Columbia stands to gain quite a bit from the Olympics, should they come to New York. Baker Field is slated to be the site for the field hockey matches and the IOC is committed to spending a lot on renovations should New York get the nod.

These renovations would especially benefit the field hockey team, which would receive world-class facilities. It might benefit the soccer and baseball teams as well, whose fields would also be upgraded so that they could serve as practice fields.

For Columbia’s long-suffering sports fans, though, the most exciting part of having the Olympics at Baker Field would be watching the world’s elite athletes play at our home field.

But more than improved fields and Columbia pride have to be forthcoming if a project this large is going to be worth it: the costs are enormous. First, the financial expenses are staggering: the Games cost Athens, which hosted the Olympics this past summer, about $9 billion. Made concrete, that’s more than twice Columbia’s endowment, or about $110 per New York resident.

Also, because New York is so much bigger than Athens, the city will probably have to pay even more than Athens did for security and closing down the city—which raises another problem for New Yorkers. After the Republican National Convention ended, most New Yorkers who were polled said they wished it had never come. Multiply the convention by a lot, and spread it throughout the city instead of confining it to midtown Manhattan, and you have the Olympics.

From the perspective of the IOC, there are many reasons not to give New York the Games, especially since two Olympics Games have recently been held in the United States.

Because of its symbolic value, New York presents huge security risks. And President George W. Bush refused an IOC request that he remove mention of the Olympics from a campaign ad last summer that touted the Iraqis’ participation in the 2004 Games, a sign of disrespect that only intensified the disgust that most of the world has with America’s president. If Bush keeps the United States from getting the Olympics, it will be best thing he has done for the city in a long while.