Editorial: Chicago misses Olympic bid, Obama’s trip to Copenhagen still justified

It wasn’t even close for Chicago. Of the 94 votes cast by the International Olympic Committee in the first round, Chicago received a slim 18 votes despite being a favored candidate to host the 2016 Olympics. Three other cities were in the running besides Chicago: Tokyo, Rio de Janeiro and Madrid. For Chicago, and all of America for that matter, it was a stinging loss. But President Barack Obama’s trip to Copenhagen still wasn’t a wasted endeavor.

When Obama made the 11th-hour trip to Copenhagen to advocate for Chicago, some — particularly those of the Right wing — saw the trip as a distraction from key issues, such as the ongoing war in Afghanistan and the perpetual health care debate. Michael Steele, Republican National Committee Chariman, expressed his disagreement with Obama’s action, according to CNN.

“I think at a time of war, I think at a time of recession, at a time where Americans have expressed rather significantly their concerns and frustrations over the course of the spring and summer … this trip, while nice, is not necessary for the president,” he said. Unfortunately, neither Obama’s address nor Michelle Obama’s sentimental speech to members of the voting committee swayed the IOC toward choosing Chicago. It might have been a somber flight home for the Obamas, but their efforts demonstrated a level of commitment to an issue that is no less relevant than other national concerns.

Obama was the first American president to attend an IOC vote among other government leaders, heads of state and royalty. His visit was intended to be quick and to the point. Sure, the short time he spent pushing for Chicago could’ve been spent focusing on big issues, but the Olympics carry international prestige. They’re an endeavor worth fighting for.

The Olympics place a significant construction and organizational burden on the host city. Yet, the city garners the the world’s attention and, even though construction costs run high, there’s more money generated from the games in tourism.

Chicago is Obama’s adopted hometown, and that fact assuredly carried clout in Obama’s vigorous support. While this is a particularly sore loss to Chicagoans, it affects all Americans. But bashing Obama over what seems an abysmal failure wouldn’t be an appropriate response. The vote wasn’t close and Chicago likely would’ve still lost with or without the president and Michelle Obama’s presence in Copenhagen. Obama’s effort exemplifies his concern over this issue, and, if nothing else, he tried his best.

Of the other cities in contention — Madrid and Tokyo — Rio de Janeiro seems the city that can benefit the most in terms of its image. Rio will be the first South American city to host the Olympics. It’s a sign of progress not only for Brazil, but for all of South America. With an estimated 2008 GDP of $1.993 trillion, Brazil’s economy is among the fastest growing in the world. It not only has the money to put on a good show — the Rio Olympic organizing committee plans to spend $14 billion on the affair — but the 2016 games will continue to advance the development of South America.