511

tions to the Commission regarding the efficacy of its Rules and Procedures, they will reflect a careful examination of this issue. At that time I am certain that the Commission will consider modifying its procedures if necessary to ensure that we achieve our broad mandate to fully address ethical matters within the Olympic Movement.

I am also happy that the IOC voted this past weekend in support of the major reforms developed by the IOC 2000 Reform Commission, which counts Dr. Henry Kissinger among its members. These reforms—which were strongly influenced by the good work done by the Special Bid Oversight Commission chaired by Senator Mitchell and Vice-Chairman Ken Duberstein—will bring about permanent and positive change to the way the IOC operates. Some of these reforms will be critically important to the Ethics Commission's effort to fully implement and enforce the Code of Ethics, such as the inclusion in the Olympic Oath of a commitment to compliance with the Code of Ethics; requiring a contract with all bid cities that stipulates adherence to the Code; allowing the Ethics Commission to appoint three members to the newly-established Nominations Commission, which will screen prospective candidates for IOC membership; and, of course, the banning of travel to bid cities. The adoption of broad reforms by the IOC is indeed a watershed moment in its long history and I applaud the huge effort required to make this a reality.

While I was initially skeptical about whether the IOC would undertake serious ethical and structural reforms in a fairly short period of time, it is now my distinct impression that the IOC—its leaders and its members—fully recognize the need to restore the Movement's credibility. And, as evidenced by the actions taken this past weekend, I believe that they are willing to make the tough decisions necessary to do so. The entire Olympic Movement must now join with the IOC in accepting shared responsibility for preserving the integrity of the Movement for generations to come and ensuring that the Olympics and the spirit of Olympism will rise above the difficulties of the past year. Ultimately, we all want the Olympics to be about the athletes and the competition, not about ethical scandals.

Thank you for allowing me to express my views and I will be happy to entertain your questions.

Thank you, Mr. Leader.

Mr. UPTON. Dr. Kissinger, welcome back.

## TESTIMONY OF HON. HENRY KISSINGER

Mr. KISSINGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

When I was asked to join the reform commission, I had the same reaction as Senator Baker. I did not know much about the organization of the IOC. Frankly, I didn't know the difference between the IOC and the national committees and the various groups composing it. But I did have an experience as a boy in Germany when the Olympic Games were held there in 1936 and brought about for a brief period an easing of pressure on the community to which I belonged.

And so from this early time on, I have associated the Olympic movement with humanitarian purposes, with contributing to a world in which people can compete on the basis of merit and excellence and not on the basis of any other consideration. So I was honored to have an opportunity to contribute to the charge that was given to us, which was to reform the International Olympic Committee so that it would be transparent, its actions predictable, and on the highest ethical level.

I know all the members of the Ethics Commission—or almost all the members of the Ethics Commission. I know all the outside members well. Senator Baker has been a close friend of mine for decades and needs no introduction here. But also the French member and also Perez de Cuellar, a man of extraordinary distinction.

I happened to work on the committee in which I participated in the reform commission with the judge from Senegal who is chairman, and I want to assure the members who have raised very just

512

tified concerns whether the vice chairman of the IOC could be relied upon to be scrupulous, he is one of the most distinguished individuals that I have met, and he was a driving force in the reforms that were actually adopted. And Senator Baker has already referred to Kevan Gosper from Australia. So I have enormous confidence in the Ethics Commission. And it is of course true that the Ethics Commission, as a continuing supervisory body, will have a major responsibility for the spirit in which the other reforms are carried out.

We were organized in three groups, and I was particularly familiar with the organization of the Olympic Commission and somewhat, through Paul Allaire, with the requirements for auditing of regular reports and procedures which parallel those of major American and international corporations.

Our purpose in addressing the issue of organization was to set up a system where this election of members, their conduct and their organization, would be transparent and would be open to the outside world. So we proposed a selection committee of seven members, three of whom are outsiders, one of whom is an athlete, and three members of the IOC. So a majority of the members of the selection committee are outsiders. We proposed an age limit of 70 in order to make possible a rotation and various limitations on terms of office for the President and for the Executive Committee.

We believe that, coupled with the creation of an Ethics Commission, insofar as any organization can guarantee a behavior that is widely understood and generally accepted, we have come as close to achieving this as we were able to. I must stress that on the commission on which I serve we were never aware of any particular views that Mr. Samaranch might have, and I can think of no proposal that was made that was not accepted.

The basic guidance toward which I tried to orbit the activities of the commission was the Mitchell report. I met with Senator Mitchell, Mr. Duberstein and their associates at great length, before I even met with any member of the IOC. I did talk with Ken Duberstein because Senator Mitchell was otherwise engaged. I talked to Ken Duberstein at least once a week as we were progressing on our work, and I have the impression—of course, he can speak for himself—that what we proposed is consistent with the recommendations of the Mitchell Commission and could not have been achieved without the work that the Mitchell Commission had done.

I also stayed in close touch with the athletes and with General McCaffrey in the White House in order to bring about a reconciliation between the approach of the IOC to the drug problem and the view of the White House to the drug problem, and I believe that this problem has been solved to the satisfaction of both sides by creating an independent commission.

These were the basic thrusts of our effort. I think we owe it to the members of the IOC to say that there were of course some bad apples. But the vast majority of the IOC members are trying to serve the ideals of the Olympic movement. And certainly all the ones that I met that were actually engaged in the reform program were actively supporting the effort that was being made. And I believe that after a very short period of time enough fresh blood is

513

going to be introduced to achieve the objectives that we all share and to which this committee has so greatly contributed.

Thank you very much.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Duberstein. Welcome back, particularly in light of your pinch-hitting role for former Leader Mitchell, who is stuck in Michigan.

## TESTIMONY OF HON. KEN DUBERSTEIN

Mr. DUBERSTEIN. Mr. Chairman, it is an honor to appear before this subcommittee yet again. Senator Mitchell, as you stated, was supposed to testify. He was detained by the fog in Michigan, certainly not by the fog in Washington.

I am honored to be in a program with two gold medal winner Americans, Henry Kissinger and Howard Baker. They are the best in American public service.

I am appearing today as the vice chairman, pinch-hitting for George Mitchell, of the special commission appointed by the U.S. Olympic Committee President Bill Hybl in December, a year ago, to review the circumstance surrounding the selection of Salt Lake City to host the 2002 Winter Olympic Games. Serving with me on the commission were Chairman George Mitchell, my other Vice Chairman Don Fehr, and members Roberta Cooper Ramo and Jeff Benz.

We made public our recommendations on March 1, which seems like a long time ago. As we reported to the Senate Commerce Committee in April, and to you in October, we concluded that the activity of the Salt Lake City bid committee was not isolated. Rather, it was part of a broader culture in which candidate cities provided items of value to International Olympic Committee members as a way of influencing their votes. This culture, we concluded, was made possible in part by the closed nature of the IOC and by the absence of transparency and accountability.

We also concluded that some of the actions of the USOC in support of the Salt Lake City bid effort were inappropriate, and we made a series of recommendations in this regard. The USOC's response was quick and decisive, and by the time of the Senate hearing in April, I was able to report that the USOC had implemented all of our recommendations.

We made 15 recommendations to the IOC. They largely fell into three categories: financial transparency, site selection, and IOC structure and accountability.

The actions taken by the IOC last weekend, we believe, represent real progress in all three categories. We commend President Samaranch, Henry Kissinger, Howard Baker, Paul Allaire, Dick Ebersol, Peter Ueberroth, Bill Hybl, and the others, all of whom participated in the reform effort. Let me underscore, we believe that progress has been made.

In the first two categories, financial transparency and site selection, the IOC's actions were significant. They generally were consistent with the recommendations of our commission. In one important respect, on the matter which sparked the controversy, visits to bid cities by IOC members, the ban adopted by the IOC goes even further than we recommended.