Expressing concerns about undefined cost mandates and implementation issues
associated with S.4547, the proposed Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act of
2020, the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ARCI) believes Legislators
should require more information about how the legislation will impact
individual States before moving forward with the proposal.
“The RCI Board believes there are some very good things in this bill,” said Ed
Martin, President of the ARCI. “But there is a huge financial unknown
concerning the cost, especially how it will impact smaller and mid-sized racing
entities and exactly how this is to be implemented.”
Martin said the ARCI is committed to a smooth transition once the proposal is
enacted into law, noting that the legislation addresses issues long advocated
by the association, specifically uniform rules and testing. “This
legislation accomplishes that and also solves the funding issue that has been
an annual headache for every racing commission,” he said.
The ARCI Board met this week and discussed the proposal at length. “There
are many questions about how this will work and a general concern about how
smaller and midsized racing venues will survive if required to pay additional regulatory
expenses,” he said. A staff analysis of the legislation noted at least 35
racing venues in 19 US States that should be monitored to assess the extent to
which they will be able to withstand additional financial mandates imposed by
the legislation.
The RCI Board felt that there were too many unanswered questions to embrace the
legislation at this time although directors from Kentucky spoke in favor, West
Virginia against, and some other jurisdictions withheld comment pending direction
from their full Commission.
Other than shifting medication rule making authority and in some jurisdictions
the responsibility for operating and paying for the enforcement program, the
State Racing Commissions are perhaps the entities least impacted by this legislation.
There is a concern that in an attempt to strengthen racing, this bill may
reduce racing opportunities in some communities with a ripple effect on local
economies, particularly in the agricultural sector.
“The RCI Board believes the sponsors and proponents of this bill should allay
those fears by providing details about the anticipated costs associated with
the new Authority and the Enforcement Agency as well as state specific
operational costs should they assume the entire enforcement program now
operated by the State,” Martin said.
Martin said that the statute, when implemented, will be similar in some ways to
the system in place for RCI Members in Canada, except that investigations there
and adjudications are handled by Provincial Racing Commissions with testing and
screening limits handled by a federal agency uniformly.
