What the Olympics cost U.S. taxpayers

Bob Martin Goat Hill Gazette
Posted 2/21/14

As I was watching the current summer Olympic games from Sochi last weekend and pondering just how much the games cost us I decided to make an attempt to find out some cost information about the games. I found it from an organization named the U. S. …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Subscribe to continue reading. Already a subscriber? Sign in

Local reporters keeping you informed across the Alabama Gulf Coast.

You can cancel anytime.
 

Please log in to continue

Log in

What the Olympics cost U.S. taxpayers

Posted

As I was watching the current summer Olympic games from Sochi last weekend and pondering just how much the games cost us I decided to make an attempt to find out some cost information about the games. I found it from an organization named the U. S. Athletic Trust.

Last year The United States Olympic Committee, the only 501(c)3 non-profit sanctioned by Congress to represent the United States at the Olympic Games released its IRS 990 tax return for 2012 which covers the USOC’s income for the previous 4-year Olympic cycle.

So let’s start with the athletes: how much of the USOC’s budget went to them for direct support? That total according to the U. S. Athletic Trust, is $81.6 million for athletic performance support training, medical benefits, insurance, college tuition assistance, awarding top finishers and special grants. It is included in the 2009-2012 budget for the USOC which totaled nearly $800 million. The highest funding amounts go to swimming, track and field, gymnastics, rowing, volleyball, sailing, wrestling, shooting, water polo and hockey.

Most athletic stipends, which are awarded only to the top-ranked athletes, are in the $400 to $2,000 per month range.

Administrative expenses compose about 12 percent of the total budget. In 2012 USOC executives received about 12 percent of the total USOC budget.

The largest recipient of USOC funds in 2011, a non-Olympic year, were the U. S. Snowboard Association, $3.45 million, USA Track and Field, $2.72 million; US Speed skating, $2.52 million; USA Swimming, $2.49 million; and US Shooting with $1.75 million.

So watch the games with some knowledge of what they cost but continue to pull for our athletes.

Story implicates Riley and Bentley

An investigative piece by John Archibald of The Birmingham News has implicated both Former Gov. Bob Riley and Gov. Robert Bentley and six Birmingham city council members in a pay-to-play scheme orchestrated by a Birmingham developer.

Developer Franklin L. Haney gave Riley at least $130,000 and Bentley $90,000.

One of Riley’s last acts as governor was to sign a lease that would consolidate Jefferson County’s Department of Human Resources and move that agency into the 290,000 square foot Haney building. Annual rent on that building began at $1.2 million a year, according to the lease, but rises this year to $5 million for the remainder of the term. It was later that spring, after Bentley took office, that the DHR move was announced.

Bentley spokeswoman Jennifer Ardis said the money was for his inaugural fund and had nothing to do with the building. She said he could not have stopped the move into the Social Security building if he had tried. Attempts to reach Haney’s lawyer in Birmingham by the News, were unsuccessful.

Haney – who was indicted but acquitted in the late ‘90s on charges related to campaign violations involving the Clinton-Gore campaign – has had a long history in Birmingham.

But the real stinger now, as Birmingham contemplates paying $5.3 million a year to lease space in Haney’s building until 2043, is that it used to be Birmingham’s building, Archibald writes. In 1991, former Mayor Richard Arrington negotiated a deal for the city to sell Haney the building for $7.2 million. He used the money to pay for the Civil Rights Institute, which voters had refused to fund.

Thanks to the News and Archibald for great reporting.

State’s Obamacare signups surpassing national average

Alabama appears to be beating the national average in terms of participation rates in Obamacare. The Obama administration on Wednesday released figures showing that 3.3 million people had signed up for medical coverage under the Affordable Care Act. That’s through the end of of January.

But that’s still below expectations. The New York Times reports that the Obama administration hoped to have 4.4 million enrolled by now, according to a memo written last fall by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Avalere Health, a national consultancy group, looked at participation rates for each state, setting targets based on uniform participation rates nationwide. In Alabama, enrollments were 60 percent of Avalere’s predicted number, or exactly double the participation rate in New Mexico and West Virginia.

Bob Martin is editor and publisher of The Montgomery Independent. Email him at: bob@montgomeryindependent.com