Commems Collection Modern: 1983-84 Los Angeles Olympics - The House Hearing - Part C

Day 3 of the Hearing of the Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs and Coinage (under the House Committee on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs), regarding the Los Angeles Olympic coin proposals, could be considered "Treasury Department Day", as the only scheduled witness on the agenda was Angela M. Buchanan, Treasurer of the United States.

In the interim since the last Hearing session, Representative Annunzio introduced the bill he alluded to during that session - it was a multi-coin bill that included Silver Dollars in 1983 and 1984 plus a gold $10 coin in 1984. (See 1983-84 Los Angeles Olympics - 1982 House Alternatives.)

Before hearing directly from Ms. Buchanan, Subcommittee Chairman Frank Annunzio (D-IL) made clear his belief in the capabilities of the United States ("US") Mint:

"During the consideration of an Olympic commemorative coin program there have been a number of attacks made against the U.S. Treasury and the mint. It has been suggested that the mint does not do a good Job of marketing its products and that the mint cannot handle the sale of Olympic coins proposed under my legislation.

"I personally think that we have the finest mint in the world, and that the mint is clearly capable of carrying out the program I have proposed. At the same time, I realize that if I made such a pronouncement it would never see the light of day in the California media. The California media is quick to pick up criticism of the mint regardless of the source, but has a hard time bringing itself to write or say anything nice about the mint."

Continuing...

"To those who say that the mint does not know how to market, let me direct you to the facts. In less than 4 months of this year, the mint has mailed out 1.6 million order blanks for proof sets. It has received a response from 1.1 million people who bought 3.7 million proof sets. The response from the mint mailing was 72 percent. Experts in the direct mail business will tell you that such a response is totally unheard of, and that the average direct mail response is
normally about 2 percent.

"Can the mint use that same expertise to sell Olympic coins? The Treasurer of the United States thinks so. She points out...that if her agency is given the authority to sell the coins, that she could turn over to the U.S. Olympic Committee and the Los Angeles Olympic Committee, $31 million by the end of September of this year, and $87 million in 2 years."

Annunzio also noted:

"And the most beautiful part of this Olympic fundraising is that it is done without any direct or indirect cost to the U.S. Government. We must underline that cost in these days of cutbacks and austerity, when we are asking the American people to make such monumental sacrifices through cuts in welfare programs, social security, and so forth. None of the other bills before this subcommittee can meet that test."

Of course, Representative St Germain stood ready with a rebuttal to Annunzio's remarks:

"My bill assures up-front guarantees for the Olympics without dipping into the Treasury. It faces the need to guarantee a program without risk to the Federal Government. It faces the need for a strong and rational worldwide marketing operation that can bring in the maximum revenues for the Olynpics and our athletes. It faces the reality that a successful program must go beyond the proof set mailing list of the U.S. Mint, valuable though this list is to the effort. It faces the need for enough coins of differing designs and metal content to attract all classes of purchasers in the United States and abroad. Above all, [my bill] recognizes that the 1984 Olympic games involve our national pride and that the public interest in a well-run Olympics transcends the traditional considerations that surround coinage legislation."

After a brief written statement by Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) was read into the record by Annunzio (Paul was away at a conference). Angela Buchanan was then called to testify, and immediately attempted to 'soften' the battleground:

"Before proceeding to a discussion of each bill I would like to express the Department's appreciation to both chairman Annunzio and Chairman St Germain for their efforts to develop sound commemorative coin legislation in support of the 1984 Olympic games in Los Angeles."

That said, she quickly let the Treasury Department's view on the competing bills be known:

"As a result, we have before us today two Olympic coin bills, both having merit. Each provides financial support for the 1984 Olympic games and for the training of the U.S. athletes through the facilities of the U.S. Olympic Committee. Neither bill requires appropriated funds, and neither bill will cost the American taxpayer any money. Although there are good points unique to both bills, the Treasury Department has concluded that [the bill' proposing]the 17-coin program sponsored by Chairman St Germain, is preferable."

Buchanan then proceeded to discuss the positives of St Germain's bill, along with a few potential issues with it. Overall, however, the Treasury believed it was a workable coin program proposal. Buchanan's prepared remarks were followed by an extended Q&A session.

Several points were of major interest during the Q&A:

Appropriateness of private marketing bidders

Annunzio asked Buchanan:

"Ms. Buchanan, as the Treasurer of the United States, would you feel comfortable doing business, that is turning the mint over to a company that has not paid any Federal income tax for 3 years, even though it has had millions of dollars of earnings, or another company that is a foreign-owned and operated company, or a third company that has just been cited by the SEC for a $267,000 stock fraud?"

Buchanan avoided answering the question, and responded:

"The bill that the Treasury Department is supporting today, the St Germain bill, does allow for competitive bidding. We feel that with this provision, we will have any number of bidders."

Buchanan used this "avoidance" tactic more than once in responding to Annunzio.

When he had his opportunity to question Buchanan, Representative St Germain fired back at Annunzio and his questioning of the appropriateness of the private marketing companies then under consideration for the Olympic coin program:

"Ms. Buchanan, under the Annunzio bill, these people who could back their truck up to the mint and have you shovel in the coins that they purchase on a bulk basis, is there anything that allows you to refuse to sell those coins to an individual or a corporation, or to a group of individuals who have been convicted, not just charged but convicted, of drug smuggling, violations of the Mann Act, embezzlement, tax evasion, stock fraud, bank robbery,and child abuse?"

Buchanan responded:

"From my reading of the bill, sir, no, there isn't."

St Germain continued:

"They could be guilty of all of these, and yet they could back their truck up and buy, and you can't stop them."

Buchanan responded simply:

"That would be correct."

St. Germain certainly knew how to ask a question!


The Treasury's change from opposing the 27-coin Senate (Cranston) Olympic coin bill, to being a supporter of the similar St Germain 17-coin bill:

Annunzio asked Buchanan:

"The thing that troubles me is the fact that if the Senate bill was so bad, you continued to support the Senate bill. A few weeks ago, the St Germain bill surfaced. I want to say about my good chairman that he did discuss that legislation with me. I was hoping we could work together, but our differences in the legislation are very obvious-the number of coins and the exclusiveness of the contracts to be awarded."

"Can you explain to me why the Senate bill was so good?"

Buchanan responded:

"...in an attempt to make as many changes as possible, it was in the spirit of compromise that we made certain agreements in order to get our changes implemented.

"...we felt that the changes that were implemented were sufficient to give the Treasury Department enough supervision over the marketing to relieve us of those initial concerns which we had. The St Germain bill was a dramatic improvement over those. He has implemented changes that we had hoped to get in the Senate version, but which we did not successfully obtain."


US Mint Customer Mailing List

Annunzio asked Buchanan:

"Ms. Buchanan, if the St Germain or the Senate bill becomes law, will the mint turn its mailing list over to private marketers in any way, shape, or form, to be used by them to solicit customers?

Buchanan responded:

"Mr. Chairman, the mint mailing list is the property of the U.S. Government. We have a responsibility to the individuals on that list, and that is a responsibility that we hold dear. Under no circumstances would that list be turned over to private enterprise nor would the list be used to benefit a private entity,with the exception of benefit for a group such as the Olympic committees, which would have to be legislated."


After reviewing the extended Q&A session that followed Buchanan's prepared comments, a few things appeared evident ro me:

1. Both Annunzio and St Germain tried to bolster support of their respective coin proposal by discrediting the proposal of the other. Each often tried to put Treasurer Buchanan in the middle of these efforts.

2. Buchanan was not a fan of Annunzio. Often, she avoided answering Annunzio's questions while consistently giving far more direct and supportive answers to questions raised by St Germain.

3. Annunzio and St Germain would have made excellent prosecuting attorneys.

The Q&A session ended the day's testimony, setting the stage in the coming sessions to hear from the numismatic community along with a private marketing group that was to potentially manage the large Olympic coin program.


See "TBD" - 1983-84 Los Angeles Olympics - The House Hearing - Part D to continue the story of the Olympic Coin Act for the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics.


For other of my posts about commemorative coins and medals, including more modern commemorative coin stories, see: Commems Collection