It is my belief that we can equal or surpass the magnificent effort displayed by the Japanese last February in the 11th Winter Olympic games held in Sapporo, Japan. Certainly, the incentive exists. For example, it is estimated that the games would attract around 900,000 visitors-but, of course, there would be millions more watching the events on television. The revenue for television rights should be substantial and possibly leading all other income sources. Therefore, it would be advantageous for the Denver Olympic Committee to try to get as much television time sold in advance of the Winter games. This information could then be used to more accurately project how much of a deficit the games will run.

The construction of sports facilities for the Winter games can provide the impetus for the future development of America's youth. Recreational benefits will also accrue to those who do not want to participate in athletic competition. Given proper planning, it is reasonable to assume that these new sports venues will create a winter sports heritage which can and should have a national impact.

The new Denver sports arena will serve to generate revenue throughout the year. The feasibility study would determine the primary site for the figure skating and ice hockey competition. This sports complex location is adjacent to Interstate 25 and U.S. Highway 40 and provides excellent access from all directions. It is centrally located, lying immediately west of the central business district of Denver. Judging from the planning and selection of this site, it would appear that the sports arena will be a viable economic asset for the citizens of Denver for years to come.

It is reasonable to expect that there will be opposition and discord to a project such as the winter Olympic games. Some of the criticism is well founded, particularly the issues raised over the conservation and ecological damage that will take place. It would be my hope that the Denver Olympic Committee and Secretary of the Interior would take this criticism constructively and move to take all necessary actions to protect the environment.

Further, I would hope that permanent housing units planned and built would be of sufficient quality and durability that once the games are completed, that ordinary citizens will want to purchase property and live in the area.

Finally, on the matter of financial contributions of the Federal Government, the precedent is well established. Indeed, the U.S. Government has for generations contributed to international competitions and cultural endeavors. For example, in the 1960 Olympic winter games held in Squaw Valley, Calif., the Federal expenditure was $1.300,000. Although, we are on solid ground for this kind of expenditure, I would hope that the Secretary of the Interior and the Denver Olympic Committee would go to great pains to see that this effort will not be abused by the rich business interests as has been charged. Also it is my hope that all citizens, particularly the black and Chicano populations of Colorado will share equitably in the Federal, State, and local money expended for these games.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for allowing me to testify before you this morning. I will try to answer any questions that you may have.

Mr. TAYLOR. We thank you, Mr. Metcalfe, for a very sincere, thoughtful, well-prepared statement. Now, if the games are held as proposed, what permanent benefits should result for the Denver area? Mr. METCALFE. We can talk about materialistic things, and that would be, of course, the facilities that will be left. Particularly am I concerned about the sports arena. The last figure that I had indicated that we in the United States regretfully have only one official-sized skating rink, and that is in West Allis. I was there at the dedication, and that was only about 5 years ago. And that is West Allis, Wis., a suburb of Milwaukee.

You will note in the last winter Olympic games that we had a disproportionate amount of winners coming out of that particular community because of the accessability of that facility. By the same token, with these facilities remaining, we can then have an incentive for others at least to come to these facilities and train. It is very important that a skater, like a distance runner, train on a track with the same metric distances so as to prepare himself to gage his timing on the track. From a humanitarian point of view, there is the incentive that it gives to our young athletes.

We do have a problem with how our youth are utilizing their leisure time. We do know that presently a lot of them would like to work, and unfortunately there are not jobs available. This would be an outlet for them. It would serve as an incentive to stimulate more participation in the sports, and thereby create a more wholesome effect. I am reminded of how chess recently has taken an upsurge as a result of Bobby Fisher, because he gave so much publicity to it, and I am one of those who happen to think that that was purposely done. But certainly chess was the beneficiary of that. So, by having these games and leaving these permanent facilities and conducting them, hopefully they will do as fine a job as the German people did in preparing that.

I had the pleasure of attending a luncheon the other day where we had a young lady who had won three Olympic medals. I was impressed, by the answer of the coach to a question that was posed to him as to what did he attribute the fact that there were so many Olympic records broken, and he said primarily it was attributable to the facilities built there. And I think this is a great incentive to our athletes being able to compete in there.

These are some of the advantages I see accruing from these facilities in Denver.

Mr. TAYLOR. The gentleman from California.

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ralph, I, too, want to congratulate you on a very well-prepared statement and a very fine response here off-the-cuff on the benefits of the Olympic games, especially the winter games.

I remember the Squaw Valley games very well. And many of our pitfalls should be overcome with the games of Denver.

And I thoroughly understand your reasoning in asking that many of the facilities be of a permanent nature. We went into the 1960 games in California with a very limited amount of financing, and we sort of had a piecemeal approach to it. And the Federal Government came in at the end and picked up the tab and made the games whole, both with personnel for the supervision and carrying on of the games,

and then the money that they put into the main figure skating and hockey arena. But that was built pretty much on a temporary basis, with much of the equipment. And we have never really got our just consideration out of the facilities since the games.

But in that area it spread winter sports from one end of the Sierra Nevada range to the other. And I don't think there is any place in the United States that has any more people participating in winter sports than we do in California, just from the standpoint of the games being held there. And the television and the publicity that came out of the games encourages people to go in.

And we had some very large investments being made now in new types of facilities in the field of winter sports. And they will be one of these days rebuilding the arena.

I can thoroughly agree with you about the ice skating, especially the distance skating, because ours were very temporary, as you know, they didn't last, and after the games they were taken up. So, there. is no facility for long distance or distance speed skating or short distance speed skating in California, there are no rinks around at all.

And then you spoke about the very fine facility in Wisconsin. And do hope that in the Denver deal the Government and the State and local communities put money into it, they put money into building permanent facilities and really have something left when the games are over. I think that is very, very important. And some of the facilities can be converted to other use. They did in Los Angeles. Los Angeles came out very well from the summer games.

I just learned that you are a member of the U.S. Olympic Committee interested in winter sports. Some people don't think too much of winter sports. I went through the deal of trying to bring the games to California when we met in Cortina. I was given the privilege of going before Mr. Brundage and his International Committee. And to get final approval was a real tough ordeal. But we were finally given approval. Then we were asked to do certain things from time to time. That is where I hope the local organizing committee and the other people who are responsible for the games at Denver will be out in front with some of this. We were always behind, and we went right up to the deadline before we got our facilities ready. That isn't good for staging the games.

We did get a good break from Mother Nature, the weather was good, and we had a good performance.

Mr. METCALFE. I can share your concern, Mr. Johnson. I had a similar experience, being one of the three convenors of the 1957 Pan American games that were held in Chicago. We unfortunately were not originally awarded those games; Detroit was. Detroit had declined them, and as a result of that, we made a bid for them. We had a short period of time in which to prepare for them, and I would truthfully say that I thought the games could have been held more efficiently had we had more time to prepare. I think time is of the essence now. And I would like to surface another question, a point here in regard to our participation in the funding of this $15.5 million. Heretofore the Government has not. While we have expended money from many cultural affairs, it was only in the winter games in California that we first did that. And we have paid a dear price, as you have indicated.

Mr. Chairman. I think it is time now that we became abreast with the other countries who have subsidizing, who are aiding and who are promoting it, because they recognize all of the benefits.

One of the benefits that I did not mention is the development of character, the development of leaders. And without being immodest, I would like to say how proud I am of the other distinguished member of the Congress that we have, Congressman Bob Mathias, because certainly he personifies all that the youth ought to be aspiring for. I am a great admirer of him, because he had to compete in 10 events to get the same medal that I got in one event.

Mr. TAYLOR. The gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. McKEVITT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Metcalfe, I want to thank you very much for appearing before us today. I appreciate it very much.

One thing I noticed of late-I speak to you because of your background in Olympics-there is sort of a lack of interest in the Olympics on the part of some constituents because of Munich.

I think it would be beneficial to hear your comments on Munich and the positive things, the feeling that you have about it, and what should be directed toward Denver.

Mr. METCALFE. First I would like to address myself to the one that I think can very easily be corrected, and that is the poor officiating. I think that in the Munich games that they took out a lot of human error. There were four serious mistakes that were made in the 1932 Olympic games in Los Angeles. I happened to be the victim of two of them. And then, of course, there were the others. I think now we can do that by having good, young, very efficient officials to officiate, and therefore remove the possibility of unfavorable decisions being rendered.

I talked with a number of those who were at Munich. And everyone agreed that the games were very well attended. I thought that the German Government did an exceptionally good job in planning and in the execution of it. I happen to feel strongly, in recognizing and placing myself in the position of the German people and the German Government, that their main goal was to remove the stigma of the 1936 Olympic games, where the military was so much in evidence. And while they did have sufficient security there I thought it was, because I had problems getting into the Olympic village myself, and had to get proper clearance, so I do know that there was ample security. We must recognize that those guerrillas who came in had to climb the wall, they did not come in through the gates, which showed that there was good security. I can understand the Israeli team feeling confident that they would not be molested or be bothered. One would not expect that in the Olympic games. And I think the world was caught by surprise as the result of it. But I am the last one to condemn the German people because of security, the protection, and the preparedness that they exemplified in their games. I think that they are to be commended for taking every foreseeable precaution. I regret, of course, the incident that did happen.

Mr. TAYLOR. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. METCALFE. Yes, sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. Ralph, I think you are right in stating that that which happened is not the fault of the games. It is the fault of something which goes far beyond the Olympic games. If it hadn't happened there it could have happened somewhere else.

Mr. METCALFE. That is right. They were looking for world attention, and the world attention was focused on the games.

Mr. McKEVITT. I thank you, Mr. Metcalfe.

I might say that I and my family will never forget the remarks you made to the Olympic team before they left for Munich. Thank you, again, sir.

Mr. METCALFE. Thank you, sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. The gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. KASTENMEIER. I have just one question for my colleague. And this is a rather general question-I am not particularly informed on it, perhaps he has a view-that for facilities planning, design, and construction there may be something around $60 or $70 million involved here as we see it, but the Federal Government's participation is only a portion of that. My question really is, should the National Government participate more in the Olympics, that is to say, does it become more of a national responsibility than it has been in the past, or should the Congress be willing to assume both in terms of fiscal support and in terms of all the moral support a nation can give?

Are we doing enough as a nation? Are we depending too much on voluntary groups and smaller units of government to support really what is generally identified as national participation?

Mr. METCALFE. Congressman Kastenmeier, I can't give you at this moment a categorical answer. I will give you the benefit of my thinking as of now.

We must recognize that in America we have prided ourselves that we have not had to go to the Government, to politics, for money. I think that that has to be revised. The president of the U.S. Olympic Committee made a statement to our leadership after we had them here in which he said that he wanted us to provide the money to help for the 3 years. You see, we in the United States now have a training program specially in those sports in which we are the weakest, so as to develop athletes and to help to train them. I think it is necessary that we afford the expenditure. The question is as to whether or not we will limit it to fiscal responsibility. And I think we should participate physically in the success of our Olympic teams and the facilities, and at the same time make these facilities available to the general public as they are in West Allis, Wis.

So, I think that we do need to concentrate on that.

And I think the Denver committee was modest in their request for $15.5 million.

Mr. KASTEN MEIER. Thank you.

Mr. TAYLOR. The gentleman from Alaska.

Mr. BEGICH. You will recall that you and I were discussing this just about 2 weeks ago, Mr. Metcalfe. I think the Denver committee was far too modest. In fact, if I were critical of their proposal, it would be because the Federal Government was not asked to provide more. I think it is a disgrace the way we treat the whole Olympic games when it