Posts Tagged ‘racing regulations’

Ed Martin, president of the Association of Racing Commissioners International, took exception to horse owner Barry Irwin’s guest commentary published here last week (Hey, states…take a hike!) that suggested racing would be better off if it managed to get states out of the regulatory business and allow the industry to police itself. The former executive director of the New York Racing and Wagering Board believes regulators are not part of racing’s problems but of its solutions. He also said regulators are working on an interstate compact that could bring states much closer to uniformity in rules and regulations governing the sport.By Ed Martin
Every now and then someone pops off out of frustration, raising the prospect of trying to figure out how racing can self-police its gambling enterprises. Such was the case with last week’s commentary by Team Valor president Barry Irwin suggesting the possibility that the independent state racing commissions can somehow be eliminated and the industry will just foot the bill and take care of everything, bringing all sorts of fans, new and old, back to the sport.

Yes, it is true state governments are facing hard economic times. So are the American people, including most racing participants and fans. The elimination of the government regulation of this form of gambling will destroy this sport in ways that I am sure Mr. Irwin does not intend or envision. Perhaps if there were no gambling, then his idea might make sense. So, unless he seeks a private club with no gambling everyone’s time is wasted contemplating the insane idea that elected officials are going to allow gambling enterprises to self police themselves. It’s a bad idea that will not pass the smell test.

To bolster his case, Irwin cites how the New York Racing Association in New York was victimized by the state. Excuse me, but NYRA did have to march in front of a federal judge and admit to a conspiracy to defraud the government. The “we have great racing and we know what we’re doing” defense wasn’t going to work given the magnitude of the felony that cheated the public regardless of whether they were racing fans or not. This was a terrible black eye on racing by an entity governed by some of the most prominent individuals in American Thoroughbred racing and it would not be in racing’s future interest for people to minimize the seriousness of that situation.

As one who worked on that case, it was amazing that NYRA refused to do a daily cash count and reconciliation in the mutuel department. They do that at the corner grocery store, but somehow this was something to be resisted when suggested by the state. I will never forget the day when NYRA sent in a team of some of the most politically connected trustees to argue against a daily cash count. One of those present was the president of my bank. I stopped using that man’s bank.

Sure, let’s open some champagne and make those nasty state regulators go away. After all they were the ones who investigated and cracked the case that exposed how a tote company’s computer programmer could access a live wagering file and turn a losing Breeders’ Cup Pick 6 wager into a winning one. The New York Racing and Wagering Board partnering with the New York State Police cracked that case within 48 hours of Valponi’s Classic win. What was amazing in doing the investigation was that this activity had gone on undetected for some time and no internal controls, self auditing or self policing program had safeguarded the industry’s interests. We unearthed a problem plaguing the industry and regulators alike.

Mr. Irwin seems to like the Stewards, who for the most part are employees of the state commissions. Well, we must be doing something right. But he does not appear to tolerate due process. Commissions are as frustrated with this as anyone, but perhaps if Mr. Irwin had been around in the days of Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, things might be different. In a system of due process, allegations must be proven based on solid evidence. People have a right to appeal and we are always open to solid suggestions as to how to minimize the ability of some to “play the system”. The concept of a Monarch was rejected in the revolution and we have no choice but to accept the constitutional guarantees that we all enjoy, including the scoundrels.

At no point in the almost five years I have been at RCI or the preceding nine at the New York Racing and Wagering Board did Mr. Irwin ever make a suggestion directly to either entity as to how to more effectively tackle racing’s integrity challenge. Things can always be done better but racing should never forget that when it comes to drugs, we test for more substances at deeper levels than any other professional sport. There is a lot that is done right, but you’d never know it as some explain their loss by leveling undocumented charges against winners. Perhaps if racing stopped casting aspersions on those who are successful on the track or at the betting windows we might be able to generate some excitement and attract new fans. But no, if you hit a lucky streak you must be cheating.

The only entities that sort out what is real and what is not are the state racing commissions. Those who cheat will do it for the money and the initiatives of RCI and the state regulators to track the money through independent real-time wagering monitoring have met with nothing but unexplained resistance or foot dragging from key industry entities. Some of those barriers are coming down, but oh so slowly. I agree with Mr. Irwin that cheaters can kill this sport, but why do we devote all our attention to following the drugs and virtually none to following the money? The money path will help identify the real drug problem or fraud by collusion. It is unexplainable to me that people resist when the regulators want to chase the money in addition to chasing the drugs.

The state regulators have been calling for reforms and could really use some help from the industry in terms of either money, commitment, or support in state capitals to protect commission budgets that pay for drug testing, pre-race exams, backstretch investigators, the officials, the background checks, name it. In these tough times racing regulatory commissions are vulnerable targets for state budget offices looking to fill potholes rather than test more horses for drugs or monitor betting activity. We’re not perfect, no institution or person is. But every regulator that I know is committed to trying to do the job as best as possible, despite the lack of budgetary or industry support.

There are those who want to create a federal regulator which would just create another layer that would have to be paid for. An alternative is to explore the concept of creating a national regulatory body through a new interstate compact, a mechanism for state regulators to act as one in certain instances. Just this week, 15 state regulatory commissions held a joint discussion on how a proposal working its way through the New York legislature might work in their states. There is progress being made and the impetus is coming from the RCI member staffs, vets, labs and vendors who form the backbone of the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium’s drug initiative.

When I started with RCI in 2005, we called for a new public private partnership and a restructuring of our collective “integrity efforts”. I reiterated that at this year’s Racing Congress. No takers. Rather than partner with the regulators, pool resources and improve the status quo, new entities are formed, funded and promoted by hired guns. Dump on us all you want but state racing commissions are a given and we will not stop in trying to raise the bar.

Please join with us Mr. Irwin. Perhaps together we can break the negative energy that is sinking this sport.

By Ray Paulick
Whenever I think about horse racing’s crazy-quilt regulatory system that has ruling bodies in 38 different states, I recall the time an official at some racetrack asked Hall of Famer Bill Mott to show his trainer’s license before entering a restricted area. Mott reached into his Wrangler’s and pulled out what appeared to be a full deck of laminated playing cards, held together by a rubber band wrapped around the outside.

“It’s in here somewhere,” Mott said, fumbling through individual licenses for Florida, New York, Kentucky, California, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Texas, Illinois, Delaware, Virginia, Louisiana, and maybe even his home state of South Dakota, among others.

Uniform licensing is a concept the industry has been working on for, oh, 50 years or so. They still haven’t got it figured out. In this regard, owners, trainers and other licensees are subjected to some of the most ridiculous regulatory inefficiencies any industry has ever seen. Why?

I thought about this absurdity as I read the racing industry’s latest “white paper,” this one authored by a well-intentioned group of equine veterinarians at the American Association of Equine Practitioners that suggests we all follow their recommendations, pull together, and work in concert for the overall good of the industry.

The average meaningful life of a Thoroughbred industry white paper is about 10 to 14 days – or at least it used to be. That’s about how long it took for the weekly trade magazines to dutifully detail the highlights, and then mail the magazine to their subscribers. The typical reader reaction was a collective yawn. They know how the industry works … or doesn’t. The lifespan of an industry white paper might be shorter today, given the access to the information on various Web sites.

For those who haven’t seen the AAEP treatise, it’s called “Putting the Horse First: Veterinary Recommendations for the Safety and Welfare of the Thoroughbred Racehorse.” Click here to read the entire nine-page report.

For those who want the abbreviated version, here it is: 1) the AAEP believes it is “imperative that the industry urgently demonstrate an ability to affect sweeping change without government intervention”; 2) we need to hold hands and sit around a campfire singing songs until we can reach agreement on issues related to the welfare of the horse 3) horses should not be permitted to race without at least 10 days between starts; 4) some racing secretaries are evil and racetrack management is increasingly clueless about horses; 5) more study is needed in the areas of racing, training and selling 2-year-olds; 6) adopt new whip rules; 7) keep holding hands and singing campfire songs; 8) it’s no longer acceptable for owners to heartlessly discard ex-racehorses, and it’s imperative that all jurisdictions establish and support rehabilitation, retraining and adoption agencies 9) claiming races need reform, with purses no more than 50% higher than the claiming price, drug testing of all claimed horses, and claims for horses that fail to finish a race being voided; 10) develop and adopt uniform rules, penalties, drug testing protocols, violation reporting procedures (stop me if you’ve heard this one before); and 11) keep singing and holding hands, and will someone please throw some more logs on the fire?

This industry is amazing, if for no other reason than for its ability to clear its throat and harrumph when the situation is dire. Since Eight Belles died on the track at Churchill Downs and we celebrated the highs and lows of Big Brown, an anabolic steroid-pumped Kentucky Derby winner (surely not the only one), we have had more task forces, committees, blue-ribbon panels, and alliances than we’ve mustered up before in this short a time. We’ve had the Jockey Club, the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association, and now the American Association of Equine Practitioners sounding off (and I know I’m forgetting some of the other alphabet soup orgs).

And still, Bill Mott has a pocketful of racing licenses. If we can’t do the simple things, what makes the AAEP or any other group think we are going to convince 38 state racing commissions that a $12,500 purse is too high for $8,000 claimers, or that a horse needs 10 days off before racing again?

Let’s look at the first premise of the AAEP’s white paper, that we need to “urgently demonstrate an ability” to make change without government intervention. Haven’t we had enough chances to demonstrate our ability to do so? (I enter Bill Mott’s expired trainer’s licenses into evidence.)

Why and how has the AAEP, a group of veterinarians, taken it upon themselves to state that we must do this without government assistance? I suppose if they were involved in the cattle or poultry or peanut business, they’d suggest we would be better off producing meat and other foodstuffs without interference from the United States Department of Agriculture.

The point is, we need government to help us overcome the dysfunctional regulatory structure that has led us to this mess we are in. We just need to be able to be part of the process, and not be in the adversarial role many in this industry are setting us up to be in. If we repeat the mantra that “government is enemy, government is enemy,” how do you think government is going to respond?

So with all due respect to the AAEP and its veterinarians, please stick to what you know best. In fact, this white paper completely ignores what vets know best, which is the care of horses. Nowhere in the white paper are there recommendations on such procedures as pin firing of shins of young horses, or permitting horses to race just days after receiving joint injections. To be fair, AAEP executive director David Foley said further recommendations will be forthcoming, but should those recommendations have come first, so that their own house is in order?

Tell us what you think about the chances the AAEP’s white paper recommendations will ever be implemented. Read the full report. Take our poll on the left-hand column of the Paulick Report home page, and leave your comments in the space provided below.

Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report

Sign up for our Email flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

Visit the Paulick Report for all the latest news throughout the racing world.