    [House Hearing, 116 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                        LEGISLATION TO PROMOTE THE HEALTH AND
                                 SAFETY OF RACEHORSES

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSUMER PROTECTION AND COMMERCE

                                     OF THE

                        COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                                JANUARY 28, 2020

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 116-92

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

          Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce

                       govinfo.gov/committee/house-energy
                            energycommerce.house.gov

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    48-686 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2022

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

                         FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
                                     Chairman
    BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois              GREG WALDEN, Oregon
    ANNA G. ESHOO, California              Ranking Member
    ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York             FRED UPTON, Michigan
    DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado              JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
    MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania             MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas
    JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois             STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana
    G. K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina    ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
    DORIS O. MATSUI, California          CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
    KATHY CASTOR, Florida                BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
    JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland           PETE OLSON, Texas
    JERRY McNERNEY, California           DAVID B. McKINLEY, West Virginia
    PETER WELCH, Vermont                 ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
    BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico            H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia
    PAUL TONKO, New York                 GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
    YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York, Vice     BILL JOHNSON, Ohio
        Chair                            BILLY LONG, Missouri
    DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa                 LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana
    KURT SCHRADER, Oregon                BILL FLORES, Texas
    JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III,               SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana
        Massachusetts                    MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
    TONY CARDENAS, California            RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
    RAUL RUIZ, California                TIM WALBERG, Michigan
    SCOTT H. PETERS, California          EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
    DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan             JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
    MARC A. VEASEY, Texas                GREG GIANFORTE, Montana
    ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
    ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
    NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California
    A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia
    LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
    DARREN SOTO, Florida
    TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona
                                     ------

                               Professional Staff

                       JEFFREY C. CARROLL, Staff Director
                    TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Deputy Staff Director
                    MIKE BLOOMQUIST, Minority Staff Director
                Subcommittee on Consumer Protection and Commerce

                            JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
                                    Chairwoman
    KATHY CASTOR, Florida                CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
    MARC A. VEASEY, Texas                  Ranking Member
    ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois             FRED UPTON, Michigan
    TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona              MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas
    BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico            ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
    TONY CARDENAS, California, Vice      BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
        Chair                            LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana
    LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware       RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
    DARREN SOTO, Florida                 EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
    BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois              GREG GIANFORTE, Montana
    DORIS O. MATSUI, California          GREG WALDEN, Oregon (ex officio)
    JERRY McNERNEY, California
    DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
    FRANK PALLONE, Jr.,  New Jersey (ex
        officio)

                                 C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Hon. Jan Schakowsky, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Illinois, opening statement.................................     1
        Prepared statement...........................................     2
    Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Representative in Congress from
      the State of Washington, opening statement.....................     3
        Prepared statement...........................................     4
    Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the
      State of New Jersey, opening statement.........................     5
        Prepared statement...........................................     6
    Hon. Andy Barr, a Representative in Congress from the
      Commonwealth State of Kentucky, opening statement..............    66
        Prepared statement...........................................    68
    Hon. Greg Walden, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Oregon, prepared statement.....................................    70

                                   Witnesses

    Marty Irby, Executive Director, Animal Wellness Action...........     8
    Prepared statement \1\
        Answers to submitted questions...............................   172
    Edward J. Martin, President and CEO, Association of Racing
      Commissioners International....................................    10
    Prepared statement \2\
    William M. Lear, Jr., Vice Chairman, The Jockey Club.............    11
    Prepared statement...............................................    14
        Answers to submitted questions...............................   188
    Dr. Kathleen M. Anderson, Equine Veterinarian....................    18
    Prepared statement...............................................    20
        Answers to submitted questions...............................   194
    Joseph De Francis, Chairman National Horseracing Advisory Council
      of the Humane Society of the United States.....................    28
    Prepared statement...............................................    30
        Answers to submitted questions...............................   202
    Christopher J. McCarron, Hall of Fame Jockey, Retired............    35
    Prepared statement...............................................    37
    Dennis A. Drazin, Chairman and CEO, Monmouth Park Racetrack......    39
    Prepared statement...............................................    41

                               Submitted Material

    H.R. 1754, the Horseracing Integrity Act of 2019 \3\

    ----------
    \1\ The information has been retained in committee files and also
      is available at https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF17/
      20200128/110418/HHRG-116-IF17-Wstate-IrbyM-20200128.pdf.
    \2\ The information has been retained in committee files and also
      is available at https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF17/
      20200128/110418/HHRG-116-IF17-Wstate-MartinE-20200128.pdf.
    \3\ The information has been retained in committee files and also
      is available at https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF17/
      20200128/110418/BILLS-1161754ih.pdf.
    Letter of January 22, 2022, from Tom V. David, DVM, to Ms.
      Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris-Rogers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky    71
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from Samantha Smith, the Jockey Club,
      to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris-Rogers, submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky \4\
    Letter from the New York Racing Association, of January 23, 2020,
      from David T. O'Rourke, Chief Executive Officer and President,
      NYRA, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rogers, submitted by
      Ms. Schakowsky.................................................    73
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from Arthur Gray, Standardbred
      Horsemen, Presiding Judge and Integrity Consultant, to Mr.
      Pallone, et. al., and Ms. McMorris-Rogers, submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................    75
    Statement of January 28, 2020, from William W. Thomason, Jr.,
      President and Chief Executive Officers, Keeneland Association,
      Inc., submitted by Ms. Schakowsky..............................    76
    Letter of January 15, 2020, from Barbara Hodges, DVM, MBA, et
      al., HSVMA Director of Advocacy and Outreach, from the Humane
      Society Veterinary Medical Association, submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................    78
    Letter of January 14, 2020, from Freddie Hudson, Executive
      Director, and Susan Arrington, Director of Federal Affairs,
      U.S. Harness Racing Alumni Association, to Mr . Pallone, et.
      al., submitted by Ms. Schakowsky...............................    80
    Letter of January 14, 2020, from 50 horse trainers, Equisponse,
      to Mr. Pallone and Mr. Walden, et. al., submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................    82
    Letter of January 27, 2020, from Cheryl Jackson, the Homes for
      Horses Coalition, to Mr. Pallone, et al., submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................    84
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from Arthur Hancock, President, Stone
      Farm, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted by
      Ms. Schakowsky.................................................    86
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from John Ward, Joe Gorajec and
      William Koester, former chairmen of the Association of Racing
      Commissioners International, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris
      Rodgers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky...........................    88
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from A. Gary Lavin, former president
      of the American Association of Equine Practitioners, to Ms.
      Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rogers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky    90
    Letter of January 15, 2020, from Nancy L. McLean, University of
      Edinburgh, (MSC) Equine Science, to Mr. Pallone, et al.,
      submitted by Ms. Schakowsky....................................    92
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from R. Anthony Chamblin, Supporting
      Member of the Water Hay Oats Alliance, to Ms. Schakowsky and
      Ms. McMorris Rogers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky...............    95
    Letter of January 24, 2020, from Governor Steven L. Beshear and
      Mrs. Jane K. Beshear, to Subcommittee Members, submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................    97
    Letter of January 24, 2020, from Sid Gustafson, Doctor of
      Veterinary Medicine, to Mr. Pallone, et al., submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................    98
    Letter of January 24, 2020, from Barry Irwin, Team Valor
      International, to Mr. Pallone, et. al., submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................   104
    Letter of January 27, 2020, from Staci Hancock, Water Hay Oats
      Alliance, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted
      by Ms. Schakowsky..............................................   106
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from Matt F. Iuliano [YOU-LEE-AH-NO],
      Executive Vice President and Executive Director, Jockey Club,
      to Ms. Schakowsky..............................................   125
    Letter from Stuart Janney, Chairman of the Jockey Club, to Ms.
      Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................   127

    ----------
    \4\ The information has been retained in committee files and also
      is available at https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF17/
      20200128/110418/HHRG-116-IF17-20200128-SD004.pdf.
    A list of the current 38 Parimutuel racing jurisdictions,
      submitted by Ms. Schakowsky....................................   129
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from Terrence P. Finley, West Point
      Thoroughbreds, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rogers,
      submitted by Ms. Schakowsky....................................   131
    Letter of January 8, 2020, from Travis T. Tygart, CEO, U.S. Anti-
      Doping Agency, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers,
      submitted by Ms. Schakowsky....................................   133
    Letter of January 27, 2020, from Vinnie Viola, St. Elias Stables,
      LLC, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted by
      Ms. Schakowsky.................................................   135
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from A. Gary Lavin, Water Hay Oats
      Alliance, Supporting Member, to Schakowsky and McMorris
      Rodgers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky...........................   137
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from Dr. Douglas K. Daniels, Virginia
      Equnie, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted
      by Ms. Schakowsky..............................................   139
    Letter from Keith Crupper, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris
      Rodgers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky...........................   141
    Letter of January 24, 2020, from F. D. Marcum, DVM, President,
      Equine Health and Welfare Alliance, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms.
      McMorris Rodgers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky..................   143
    Letter of January 24, 2020, from E. J. Hamelback, CEO, National
      Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association, to Ms.
      Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................   145
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from David McShane, President, Iowa
      Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association, to Ms.
      Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................   152
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from Jon Moss, Executive Director,
      Iowa Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association, to Ms.
      Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................   153
    Letter from the Horsemen of West Virginia, to Ms. Schakowsky and
      Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky..............   154
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from Dr. Thomas Tobin, Veterinary
      Surgeon, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted
      by Ms. Schakowsky..............................................   157
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from Nick Meitinnis, DVM, North
      American Association of Racetrack Veterinarians, to Ms.
      Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................   163
    Letter of January 23, 2020, from MaryAnn O'Connell, Executive
      Director, Washington National Horsemen's Benevolent and
      Protective Association, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris
      Rodgers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky...........................   165
    Letter from Craig Huffhines, First Vice President and Janet
      VanBebber, Chief Racing Officer, the American Quarter Horse
      Association, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers,
      submitted by Ms. Schakowsky....................................   167
    Letter of January 27, 2020, from Rick Hiles, President, Kentucky
      Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association, to Ms.
      Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers, submitted by Ms.
      Schakowsky.....................................................   168
    Letter of January 28, 2020, from Nancy Blaney, Director, Animal
      Welfare Institute, to Ms. Schakowsky and Ms. McMorris Rodgers,
      submitted by Ms. Schakowsky....................................   170

           LEGISLATION TO PROMOTE THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF RACEHORSES

                                  ----------

                           TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 2020

                      House of Representatives,
      Subcommittee on Consumer Protection and Commerce,
                              Committee on Energy and Commerce,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:31 a.m., in
    room 2322, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jan Schakowsky
    (chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding.
        Present: Representatives Schakowsky, Castor, Veasey, Kelly,
    O'Halleran, Cardenas, Blunt Rochester, Soto, McNerney, Dingell,
    Pallone (ex officio), Rodgers (subcommittee ranking member),
    Burgess, Latta, Guthrie, Hudson, Carter, Gianforte, and Walden
    (ex officio).
        Also present: Representative Tonko.
        Staff present: Evan Gilbert, Deputy Press Secretary; Lisa
    Goldman, Senior Counsel; Waverly Gordon, Deputy Chief Counsel;
    Daniel Greene, Professional Staff Member; Tiffany Guarascio,
    Deputy Staff Director; Alex Hoehn-Saric, Chief Counsel,
    Communications and Consumer Protection; Zach Kahan, Outreach
    and Member Service Coordinator; Joe Orlando, Staff Assistant;
    Alivia Roberts, Press Assistant; Tim Robinson, Chief Counsel,
    Chloe Rodriguez, Policy Analyst; Rebecca Tomilchik, Staff
    Assistant; Mike Bloomquist, Minority Staff Director; Jordan
    Davis, Minority Senior Advisor; Tyler Greenberg, Minority Staff
    Assistant; Bijan Koohmaraie, Minority Deputy Chief Counsel,
    Consumer Protection and Commerce; Tim Kurth, Minority Chief
    Counsel, Consumer Protection and Commerce; and Brannon Rains,
    Minority Legislative Clerk.
        Ms. Schakowsky. The Subcommittee on Consumer Protection and
    Commerce will now come to order.
        The Chair will now recognize herself for 5 minutes for
    opening statements.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAN SCHAKOWSKY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                  CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

        So today's hearing is to discuss H.R. 1754, the Horseracing
    Integrity Act. This bill is vital for the health of equine
    animals, jockeys, and horseracing itself. The protection of
    animals overall and horseracing and horses in particular is
    very important in my district. I hear--my office has received
    literally thousands of letters in support of horse welfare in
    recent years.
        I was the proud owner of a Thoroughbred who actually never
    won at the track but was always very good to me. There is an
    urgent and desperate need for this legislation. Last year, 38
    horses died at Santa Anita, at Santa Anita Park alone. In the
    final race of the season, the horse Mongo--Mongo Groom died
    just 200 yards from the finish line. Earlier this month, two
    racehorses were euthanized on the same day at Harrah's
    Louisiana Downs. Frankly, one death is too many, but the
    inexcusable fact is that we can do more to prevent these
    deaths.
        Patchwork oversight, and spotty regulation means horses are
    often treated with drugs designed to enhance their performance
    without concern for their health. Jockeys face real danger as
    well. And we are so happy to have Hall of Fame jockey Chris
    McCarron who is here today. Because doped horses are more
    likely to fall and injure themselves, riders risk serious
    injury as well.
        The lack of uniform regulation and supervision means State
    commissions allow parties to play by their own rules. Too
    often, they are at the expense of the horse.
        Horseracing is a historical sport, but it faces rapid
    decline if these problems persist. The continuation of
    avoidable racehorse deaths will erode confidence in every facet
    of the sport.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Schakowsky follows:]

                   Prepared Statement of Hon. Jan Schakowsky

        Good morning, thank you all for being here with us.
        Today's hearing is to discuss H.R. 1754, the Horseracing
    Integrity Act. This bill is vital for the health of equine
    athletes, jockeys, and horseracing itself.
        The protection of animals over all, and horses, in
    particular, is very important in my district; my office has
    received thousands of letters in support of horse welfare in
    recent years.
        I was the owner of a thoroughbred who never won on the
    track, but was always good to me.
        There is an urgent and desperate need for this legislation.
    Last year 38 horses died at Santa Anita Park alone. In the
    final race of the season, the horse Mongolian Groom died just
    200 yards from the finish line.
        Earlier this month, two race horses were euthanized on the
    same day at Harrah's Louisiana Downs.
        Frankly, one death is too many. But the inexcusable fact is
    that we can do more to prevent these deaths.
        Patchwork oversight and spotty regulation mean horses are
    often treated with drugs designed to enhance their performance
    without concerns for the health risks.
        Jockeys face a real danger as well and we're so happy to
    have Hall of Fame jockey, Chris McCarron with us today. Because
    doped horses are more likely to fall and injure themselves,
    riders risk serious injury.
        The lack of uniform regulation and supervision means state
    commissions allow parties to play by their own rules-too, often
    at the expense of the horse.
        Horseracing is a historical sport, but it faces a rapid
    decline if this persists. The continuation of avoidable
    racehorse deaths will erode confidence in every facet of this
    sport.

        Thank you, and I yield the balance of my time to
    Congressman Tonko.
        So I want to yield the balance of my time to the sponsor of
    the legislation, and that is Congressman Paul Tonko.
        Mr. Tonko. Well, thank you, Madam Chair.
        And thank you and Chairman Pallone and our friends across
    the aisle for hosting today's hearing which is incredibly
    important to the future of this industry. I am pleased that we
    are holding this hearing today to learn about the Horseracing
    Integrity Act and how we can ensure that the sport of kings
    continues to thrive well into the future.
        This is an issue near and dear to my heart as I represent
    the Nation's oldest track in operation, the Saratoga Race
    Course, which has long been steeped in the storied tradition of
    this sport. Today, we find ourselves at an inflection point
    with regard to the future of horseracing. High-profile horse
    deaths at Santa Anita and around the country have tainted the
    sport in the eyes of the public and have called into question
    the future viability of horseracing in the United States.
        Those who love the sport are forced to choose between two
    paths as we move forward. The path of least resistance would be
    to do nothing. By ignoring the criticism and continuing with
    business as usual, we would be accepting a steady decline as
    the new normal, tragedies would mount, and the sport would
    continue to lose credibility with the American public. Some
    States would likely take the drastic step of eliminating
    horseracing altogether.
        Alternatively, the horseracing industry could choose the
    more difficult path of action. This path of reform would
    require introspection and some disruption of the status quo for
    those in the industry, but at the end of the day, the sport
    would emerge stronger and poised for continued success in the
    decades to come.
        Today, we will take that first step on the path of action,
    and I thank our witnesses for adding their voices to this
    important conversation. By advancing the Horseracing Integrity
    Act and placing the majestic equine athletes front and center,
    we can truly capture the imagination of the Nation and the
    sport of horseracing can thrive and grow with time. Let's make
    2020 a year of action and get the Horseracing Integrity Act
    across the finish line.
        With that, I yield back, Madam Chair, the balance of my
    time.
        Ms. Schakowsky. And I yield back my time.
        And the Chair now recognizes Mrs. Rodgers, the ranking
    member, for the subcommittee for her 5-minute opening
    statement.

          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, A
        REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

        Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Good morning, and welcome everyone to the Consumer
    Protection and Commerce Subcommittee legislative hearing. Today
    we will focus on H.R. 1754, the Horseracing Integrity Act of
    2019.
        Horses hold an important place in our shared culture and
    history, and the industry contributes immensely to local
    communities across the country. This is a tough issue and one
    that your industry is very passionate about. I appreciate the
    panel being here today to help us better understand H.R. 1754
    and how it will impact the industry.
        I would like to raise the majority's decision to prevent
    Representative Andy Barr from providing an opening statement.
    Last Congress, when the Republicans were in the majority, we
    held a hearing on this legislation. We extended both Mr. Barr
    and Mr. Tonko the courtesy of providing opening statements on
    their own member panel because of their leadership on the
    issue. During other legislative hearings this Congress, off-
    committee members have been afforded the opportunity to testify
    on the bills they are leading on. Unfortunately, that courtesy
    was not extended today.
        I would like to use the remainder of my time to read the
    following statement prepared by Mr. Barr.
        Nothing is more synonymous with the commonwealth of
    Kentucky than Thoroughbred breeding and horseracing, which
    includes the horse capital of the world. Lexington, Kentucky,
    is surrounded by more than 400 horse farms, and Keeneland hosts
    many notable races, including the Toyota Bluegrass Stakes and
    the Breeders Cup, which will be held again at the racetrack
    this fall.
        With the privilege of representing this unique industry
    comes to the responsibility of fighting for its future.
    However, this sport is not solely relevant to those States that
    are home to the Triple Crown races, like Kentucky, Maryland,
    and New York. Horseracing is very much a national sport.
        The horse industry contributes approximately $50 billion in
    direct economic impact to the United States economy and has the
    direct employment impact of nearly a million jobs; 988,394.
    Therefore, advocating for this industry requires more than
    celebrating its proud heritage.
        Currently regulated by 38 separate jurisdictions, the
    horseracing industry labors under a patchwork of conflicting
    and inconsistent State-based rules governing prohibited
    substances, lab accreditation, testing, and penalties for
    violations. This lack of uniformity has impeded interstate
    commerce, compromised the international competitiveness of the
    industry, and undermined public confidence in the integrity of
    the sport.
        The Horseracing Integrity Act would remedy these problems
    by authorizing the creation of a nongovernmental, anti-doping
    authority, governed by representatives of all major
    constituencies of the industry and responsible for implementing
    a national uniform medication program for the entire
    horseracing industry. A national uniform medication program is
    not about creating more bureaucracy or regulation. Rather, it
    is about streamlining the current regulatory structure to
    ensure the safety of our athletes.
        The most recent draft of the Horseracing Integrity Act was
    developed through a highly deliberative and bipartisan process
    and took into consideration a diversity of perspectives from
    all parts of the industry. The result is support from a
    majority of members of the House. We must build on the momentum
    in Congress and the industry as a whole to ensure the safety of
    our athletes and increase the popularity, public confidence,
    and international competitiveness of the sport.
        I would like to offer Mr. Barr's full written statement for
    the record.
        Thank you and I yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Mrs. Rodgers follows:]

               Prepared Statement of Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers

        Good morning and welcome to the Consumer Protection and
    CommerceSubcommittee legislative hearing. Today we will focus
    on H.R. 1754, the ``Horseracing Integrity Act of 2019."
        Horses hold an important place in our shared culture and
    history, and the industry contributes immensely to local
    communities across the country.
        This is a tough issue and one that your industry is very
    passionate about.
        I appreciate the panel being here today to help us better
    understand H.R. 1754 and how it will impact your industry.
        I'd like to address the Majority's decision to prevent
    Representative Barr from providing an opening statement.
        Last Congress, when we were in the Majority and held a
    hearing on this legislation, we extended both Mr. Barr and Mr.
    Tonko the courtesy of providing opening statements on their own
    member panel because of their leadership on this issue.
        During other legislative hearings this Congress, off-
    committee Members have been afforded the opportunity to testify
    on bills they are leading on.
        Unfortunately, the Majority has decided not to extend that
    same courtesy today.
        I'd like to use the remainder of my time to read the
    following statement prepared by Mr. Barr.
        Nothing is more synonymous with the Commonwealth of
    Kentucky than thoroughbred breeding and horseracing which
    includes the Horse Capital of the World.
        Lexington, Kentucky, is surrounded by more than 400 horse
    farms and Keeneland hosts many notable races, including the
    Toyota Bluegrass Stakes and the Breeders Cup-which will be held
    again at the racetrack this fall.
        With the privilege of representing this unique industry
    comes to the responsibility of fighting for its future.
        However, this sport is not solely relevant to those in
    states that are home to Triple Crown Races, like Kentucky,
    Maryland, and New York. Horseracing is very much a national
    sport.
        The horse industry contributes approximately $50 billion in
    direct economic impact to the U.S. economy and has a direct
    employment impact of 988,394 jobs. Therefore, advocating for
    this industry requires more than celebrating its proud
    heritage.
        Currently regulated by 38 separate jurisdictions, the
    horseracing industry labors under a patchwork of conflicting
    and inconsistent, state-based rules governing prohibited
    substances, lab accreditation, testing, and penalties for
    violations.
        This lack of uniformity has impeded interstate commerce,
    compromised the international competitiveness of the industry,
    and undermined public confidence in the integrity of the sport.
        The Horseracing Integrity Act would remedy these problems
    by authorizing the creation of a non-governmental anti-doping
    authority governed by representatives of all major
    constituencies of the industry and responsible for implementing
    a national, uniform medication program for the entire
    horseracing industry.
        A national uniform medication program is not about creating
    more bureaucracy or regulation; rather it is about streamlining
    the current regulatory structure to ensure the safety of our
    athletes.
        The most recent draft of the Horseracing Integrity Act was
    developed through a highly deliberative and bipartisan process
    and took into consideration a diversity of perspectives from
    all parts of the industry.
        The result is support from a majority of Members of the
    House. We must build on the momentum in Congress and the
    industry as a whole to ensure the safety of our athletes and
    increase the popularity, public confidence, and international
    competitiveness of the sport.
        I'd like to offer Mr. Barr's full written statement for the
    record.
        Thank you and I yield back.

        Ms. Schakowsky. The gentlewoman yields back.
        And now I recognize the chairman of the full committee, Mr.
    Pallone, for 5 minutes.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, Jr., A REPRESENTATIVE
                IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

        Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
        New Jersey has always had a special relationship with
    horses. Our State symbol includes the head of a horse,
    representing speed and strength, and our official State animal
    is the horse. It is a small State geographically, but
    surprisingly to some, the home of tens of thousands of horses.
    About a decade ago, the Rutgers Equine Science Center found
    that the horse industry in New Jersey was responsible for $1.1
    billion in economic impact and generated about 13,000 jobs.
        And horseracing is also a popular sport across the United
    States. In 2016, there were more than 46,000 Thoroughbred and
    Quarter Horse races and more than 38,000 harnessed races held
    throughout the Nation. Wagers on thoroughbred races is a good
    indicator of the public interest in the sport, near $12 billion
    in 2018, marking the fourth consecutive year of steady
    increases. More than 30 percent of U.S. households claim a
    horse enthusiast who watches or participates in horse events.
        And the success of the sport rides on the health of its
    star athletes, the horses and the jockeys. A recent wave of
    deaths at California's Santa Anita Park has put renewed focus
    on the dangers of the sport. Tragically, 56 horses suffered
    fatal injuries at the track between July of 2018 and November
    of last year, and five horses have already died at Santa Anita
    this year.
        And when a horse suffers a catastrophic injury, the
    jockey's health and welfare are also at stake. According to a
    study published in the Orthopedic Journal of Sports Medicine,
    the most common cause of jockey falls is a catastrophic injury
    or sudden death of the horse. And over half of all falls result
    in jockey injuries.
        Today we will be exploring ways to protect horses from
    injury and improve the general health of horses, from examining
    the effect of track conditions, reducing the risk of injury,
    and the best use of medications.
        We should also be able to agree that the welfare of the
    racehorses is of the utmost importance and that the sport
    should be safe. I am committed to working with all stakeholders
    to promote the health and safety of horses and jockeys, and I
    know that the horseracing industry is continuing to actively
    work on proposals to further that aim.
        Now, thanks to the diverse panel of witnesses--we have a
    diverse panel today, and I want to thank all of you for being
    here--I am optimistic we can work together to build the
    consensus approach that protects horses, preserves the
    integrity of the sport, and maintains a level playing field.
        And I have to particularly welcome my friend, Dennis
    Drazin, who is the chairman and CEO of Darby Development, which
    operates Monmouth Park Racetrack in my district. It is not just
    in my district; it is literally walking distance from my
    congressional office and from the home where I grew up.
        Monmouth Park dates back to 1870 and hosts Thoroughbred
    racing, including the prestigious Haskell Invitational. I am
    very proud to have the track in my district, and I have to say
    that I have known Dennis and I knew his parents since I was a
    child. So thank you, Dennis, for being here and for all you do
    at Monmouth Park.
        And I yield back, Madam Chair.
        [The prepared statement of Chairman Pallone follows:]

                 Prepared Statement of Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr.

        New Jersey has always had a special relationship with
    horses. Our state symbol includes a head of a horse,
    representing speed and strength. And our official state animal
    is the horse. It's a small state geographically but,
    surprisingly to some, the home of tens of thousands of horses.
    About a decade ago, the Rutgers Equine Science Center found
    that the horse industry in New Jersey was responsible for $1.1
    billion in economic impact and generated about 13,000 jobs.
        Horseracing is also a popular sport here in the United
    States. In 2016, there were more than 46,000 thoroughbred and
    quarter horse races and more than 38,000 harness races held
    throughout the nation. Wagers on thoroughbred races--a good
    indicator of the public interest in the sport--neared $12
    billion in 2018, marking the fourth consecutive year of steady
    increases. More than 30 percent of U.S. households claim a
    horse enthusiast who watches or participates in horse events.
        That popularity has a positive impact on the U.S. economy.
    According to the American Horse Council, the horseracing sector
    generates $15.6 billion of economic activity nationally every
    year, helping support almost 250,000 jobs. And with 38 racing
    jurisdictions in the United States, that's an economic impact
    that reverberates across the country.
        The success of the sport rides on the health of its star
    athletes--horses and jockeys. A recent wave of deaths at
    California's Santa Anita Park has put renewed focus on the
    dangers of the sport. Tragically, 56 horses suffered fatal
    injuries at the track between July of 2018 and November of
    2019. Five horses have already died at Santa Anita this year.
        When a horse suffers a catastrophic injury, the jockey's
    health and welfare is also at stake. According to a study
    published in the Orthopedic Journal of Sports Medicine, the
    most common cause of jockey falls is a catastrophic injury or
    sudden death of the horse. And over half of all falls result in
    a jockey injury.
        Today, we will be exploring ways to protect horses from
    injury and improve the general health of horses-from examining
    the effect of track conditions, reducing the risk of injury,
    and the best use of medications.
        We should all be able to agree that the welfare of the
    racehorses is of the utmost importance and that the sport
    should be safe. I am committed to working with all stakeholders
    to promote the health and safety of horses and jockeys. I am
    pleased to hear that the horseracing industry is continuing to
    actively work on proposals to further that aim.
        Thanks to the diverse panel of witnesses for testifying. I
    am optimistic we can all work together to build a consensus
    approach that protects horses, preserves the integrity of the
    sport, and a maintains a level playing field.
        I would particularly like to welcome Dennis Drazin, the
    Chairman and CEO of Darby Development, which operates Monmouth
    Park Racetrack in my district. Monmouth Park dates back to 1870
    and hosts thoroughbred racing, including the prestigious
    Haskell Invitational. I'm proud to have the track in the
    district.
        Thank you, I look forward to the discussion and I yield
    back.

        Ms. Schakowsky. The gentleman yields back.
        And I would like to remind all Members that pursuant to
    committee rules, all Members' written opening statements shall
    be made part of the record.
        And now it is my pleasure to introduce and first thank all
    of the witnesses who are here. And, first, let me introduce Mr.
    Marty Irby, who is executive director of Animal Welfare Action.
    Next is Mr. Edward Martin, who is the president and CEO of the
    Association of Racing Commissioners International, Inc. Next,
    we have Mr. William Lear, Jr., vice chair of The Jockey Club.
    Next we have Dr. Kathleen Anderson, who is an equine
    veterinarian. Next, is Mr. Joseph De Francis, chairman of the
    national--what is it? Does that say horseracing? Yes, OK.
    Sorry--Dr. Joseph De Francis, chairman of the National
    Horseracing Advisory Council of the Humane Society of the
    United States. We welcome you. And, finally, Mr. Christopher
    McCarron--is that the--no, it is not the last--Mr. McCarron,
    Hall of Fame jockey.
        And--where is the last? There you are. Mr. Dennis Drazin.
    Am I saying that right?
        Mr. Drazin. Yes.
        Ms. Schakowsky. OK. Mr. Dennis Drazin, who is chair and CEO
    of Darby Development, which is the operator of Monmouth Park
    Racetrack.
        So I want to call your attention to the lights that are in
    front of you. Each of you will get 5 minutes. In front of you
    is a series of lights. The lights will initially be green at
    the start of your opening statement. Then there will be a
    yellow when you have 1-minute remaining, and finally, it will
    turn red, and at that point, we hope that you will be
    finishing. So I would recommend when it turns yellow, you start
    summarizing and ending your testimony.
        So we are going to begin with Mr. Irby, and you are
    recognized for 5 minutes.

     STATEMENTS OF MARTY IRBY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ANIMAL WELLNESS
      ACTION; EDWARD J. MARTIN, PRESIDENT AND CEO, ASSOCIATION OF
    RACING COMMISSIONERS INTERNATIONAL, INC.; WILLIAM M. LEAR, JR.,
       VICE CHAIRMAN, THE JOCKEY CLUB; DR. KATHLEEN M. ANDERSON,
     EQUINE VETERINARIAN; JOSEPH A. DE FRANCIS, CHAIRMAN NATIONAL
       HORSERACING ADVISORY COUNCIL OF THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE
     UNITED STATES; CHRISTOPHER J. MCCARRON, HALL OF FAME JOCKEY,
        RETIRED; AND DENNIS A. DRAZIN, CHAIRMAN AND CEO, DARBY
             DEVELOPMENT, OPERATOR, MONMOUTH PARK RACETRACK

                        STATEMENT OF MARTY IRBY

        Mr. Irby. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen and members of
    the committee. I want to thank Chair Schakowsky and Ranking
    Member McMorris Rodgers and Chair Pallone for conducting this
    hearing, and thank Representatives Tonko and Barr for their
    leadership on the Horseracing Integrity Act. My name is Marty
    Irby, and I am the executive director of Animal Wellness Action
    in Washington, DC.
        First, I want to underscore that we do not oppose
    horseracing. We join with many horse owners, breeders, and
    trainers in speaking out on the broader topic of horse
    protection within the equine industry. We are deeply concerned
    about on- and off-track risks for horses, including
    catastrophic injuries, sustained during racing.
        America was built on the backs of horses, and they have
    always played a central role in the economy and culture of the
    United States. We owe them a debt of gratitude, and the very
    least we must do is ensure their safety and protection.
        Horses are dying at alarming rates on racetracks across the
    U.S., posing a serious welfare problem. 2019 was a tragic year
    in U.S. horseracing, and 2020 has begun in quite the same vein.
    This epidemic has gained nationwide attention and concern, and
    42 horses have died at Santa Anita Park in California since
    December of 2018.
        The rampant doping, along with the absence of a national
    regulatory body, pose unacceptable health risks to horses.
    Horses that need to be trained to race under the influence of
    any performance-enhancing or pain-masking drug should not be
    doing so and should be resting instead.
        As a lifelong horseman, I have spent the vast majority of
    my life in the presence of horses and most of the past decade
    working to protect them. I understand their biology, their
    social characteristics, behaviors, and instincts, and I believe
    that horses are born to run.
        Equine behavior is best understood from the view that they
    as prey animals, horses are uniquely sensitive, and their first
    reaction to a threat is often to flee. But humans domesticated
    horses thousands of years ago, and more athletic breeds were
    selected for traits such as speed, agility, alertness, and
    endurance, building on natural qualities from their wild
    ancestors. These are the same traits carried today by the
    horses we see in racing competition, traits that predispose
    them to inherent vulnerabilities when overworked, resulting in
    painful and often permanent injuries. Simply masking pain or
    injury for benefit for human exploitation and capital gain has
    created an equine welfare crisis within the racing community
    and public domain alike.
        For the past five years, I have worked in concert with the
    Coalition for Horseracing Integrity to advance the Horseracing
    Integrity Act in order to bring a higher standard of care and
    safety for the horses and save equine lives.
        Today, horseracing operates under a vulcanized patchwork of
    rules that creates confusion and risk and contains gaps in
    enforcement. H.R. 1754 would greatly improve regulatory
    standards, ban the use of all medications on race day, and
    level the playing field for everyone invested in horseracing.
        The bill designates the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency as the
    independent organization that would oversee and administer drug
    testing in U.S. horseracing. Delegating that authority for
    testing, oversight, and rulemaking to USADA is the cornerstone
    of this landmark legislation and a provision that is the most
    critical component for the protection of racehorses, along with
    the legislation's specific ban on race-day medication.
        H.R. 1754 would provide USADA with the ability to impose
    penalties for cheating that apply nationwide, a lifetime ban
    for the most severe types of doping, and range of penalties for
    other serious medication violations.
        Imagine if all 32 professional football stadiums in the
    U.S. had its own set of rules with variations from stadium to
    stadium. Well, that is the scenario that U.S. horseracing
    currently operates within. And if NFL players choose to dope
    themselves and take drugs, they are the ones who have made that
    decision. Unlike human athletes, horses have no voice and they
    have no choice. And that is why we are here today and why we
    must ensure they are properly protected.
        That is--the public sentiment is rapidly shifting from a
    desire to end doping concerns about the very existence of the
    sport itself. Even Ferdinand, the winner of the 1986 Kentucky
    Derby, fell victim to the predatory industry of horse
    slaughter. If one of the Nation's most popular horses is
    prodded into a kill chute, then no horse is safe.
        And it is vitally important for the protection of American
    racehorses that the full committee also advance H.R. 961, the
    Safeguard American Food Exports Act, led by Chair Schakowsky,
    that is set to be heard tomorrow before the Health
    Subcommittee.
        The inability of the horse industry to better protect its
    equine and human athletes underscores the need for the
    Horseracing Integrity Act to pass this year. If Congress fails
    to pass the Act and the obstructionists within the industry
    continue to hinder this legislation, then we may very well see
    those who demand horseracing be brought to an end prevail.
        Our modern-day society will no longer tolerate abuse and
    horse deaths for the purposes of entertainment. This is not
    ancient Rome. This is 2020. There is no aspect of horseracing
    that should be more important than the protection, safety, and
    care of the horse.
        I ask that the Horseracing Integrity Act be advanced to the
    House floor for a vote, and thank the Chair and members for
    their support on this issue. The way in which we treat the most
    vulnerable among us is a reflection of our character as a
    Nation and a society.
        Thank you.

        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you. And thank you for keeping to the
    time.
        Mr. Martin, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

                     STATEMENT OF EDWARD J. MARTIN

        Mr. Martin. Chairwoman Schakowsky, Ranking Member Rodgers,
    and esteemed members of the subcommittee, for 85 years, the
    Association of Racing Commissioners International has put forth
    policies to ensure the safety of horses and an honest, fair
    race. We wear the white hats and we are on the front line.
    Sometimes people listen, sometimes not. Thank you for
    listening.
        The bill before you is focused on integrity and uniformity.
    We cannot support it for a variety of reasons, mostly because
    it does not address the real problem.
        The biggest problem in horseracing is dead horses. And
    while State regulatory changes have helped, more needs to be
    done by everybody. At-risk horses must be kept off the track,
    and this cannot be done without identifying and monitoring them
    throughout their racing career. Efforts underway in the mid-
    Atlantic States are helping, but statutory limitations stand in
    the way of what should be happening everywhere.
        The regulatory framework has a gaping hole: Horses that are
    not under the jurisdiction of a State commission. That must be
    closed, either by the government or by an NGO.
        The existing breed registries, like The Jockey Club, are
    uniquely positioned as every State requires racehorses be
    registered with them. They can be the NGO authorities
    regulating the care, breeding, and management of horses before
    being entered in a race or brought to the track. That is the
    point at which they come under the jurisdiction of the States.
    As guardians of their breeds, it is not inconsistent for them
    to impose requirements to protect the health of these horses so
    that they are suitable to race.
        Last summer, the ARCI board appealed to The Jockey Club to
    require the submission of all vet records, including medical
    diagnosis, treatments, and procedures, so their technology can
    identify horses in need of increased monitoring. We also
    proposed out-of-competition equine suitability testing and
    exams to red-flag horses so a track or regulatory vet would
    have the entire picture to determine whether the horse should
    be allowed to race.
        Somebody needs to do this who has extensive equine welfare
    expertise, not the entity proposed in the bill. Congress can
    designate an agency or NGO to be empowered and require
    registration to do this, if the breed registries opt not to do
    this under the existing position--special position--they
    currently have uniformly in every racing State. Every day this
    is not done, another horse is potentially at risk.
        The deaths in California underscore the crisis. Immediate
    and sweeping action is needed. It is not about the drugs; it is
    about what is going on with that horse and why they are being
    treated. You are not going to get to that by changing a drug
    rule here or who gets to make the doping rules there. That is
    why we believe this bill is inadequate.
        An independent system to make rules, enforce them, and hear
    cases is already in place. You don't need to create a new one.
    You can achieve uniformity without creating a new bureaucracy
    by putting one sentence in statute to incorporate the ARCI
    model rules of racing by reference.
        As to integrity, doping, and cheating, this is a concern of
    all sports. Some say our labs are not good. Others say they are
    too good because we detect minute levels of things in the
    environment. Well, you can't have it both ways. Our lab results
    are comparable with those of the WADA and USADA labs in human
    sports. Does that mean the labs catch everything? No. Lance
    Armstrong got past the WADA/USADA labs over 300 times before an
    informant pointed the way.
        Cheaters exist. This bill is not going to change that.
    Please know that we are never satisfied and continually strive
    to do better, as the New York lab again proved last week when
    it was the first in equine or human sport worldwide to identify
    and confirm the use of an exotic blood and gene doping agent,
    IOX-2.
        Finally, on Lasix. We do not believe equine medication
    policy should be politicized. The current policy was an
    industry welfare initiative over 30 years ago to safeguard
    horses from a condition known as EIPH. It helps the horses that
    need it; it doesn't hurt the horses that don't. This issue is
    again under review.
        Last spring, our science advisers were unanimous in
    reporting that there is nothing linking Lasix to the breakdowns
    that are killing horses. Time spent on this is time that we are
    not spending on solving the real problem in developing a bill
    to close the regulatory gap I have mentioned. You can fix this,
    and we are here to help you.
        Thank you for listening.

        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you, Mr. Martin.
        Now I recognize Mr. Lear for his 5 minutes of testimony.

                   STATEMENT OF WILLIAM M. LEAR, Jr.

        Mr. Lear. Thank you, Chair Schakowsky, Chairman Pallone,
    Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers, members of the committee, Mr.
    Tonko, Mr. Barr, my own Congressman whom I have known for many,
    many years. My name is Bill Lear. I am vice chairman of The
    Jockey Club and I am a trustee of Keeneland Racetrack.
        The goals of the Horseracing Integrity Act are simple and
    straightforward. We want the cleanest possible sport, we want
    the safest possible sport, and we want an even playing field.
    To do that, we have to fix our medication regulation system,
    and we know that and we have known that for some time, and we
    have tried to do that within our own industry. Federal
    legislation was not our choice of first resort. We tried with a
    compact. It failed. My own State, Kentucky, did pass it. Nobody
    else passed it. They are trying again with another compact, and
    it is flawed with some provisions that ultimately, in my view,
    will prevent it from being effective.
        So where are we with our current system? Four years ago, in
    response to a statement made by Mr. Martin, who is an eloquent
    custodian of the status quo--I take--I take a lot of pride in
    sitting next to him, but he does represent the status quo. I
    asked these questions about our current system. I said, do we
    have the same medication rules in place in every jurisdiction
    in the United States or even in all the major racing States?
    The answer to that then, as it is now, is no, and you have
    received a lot of information from researchers about that fact.
        Do we have the same testing rules and procedures in place
    everywhere, including best out of practices--out-of-competition
    testing practices? And, frankly, that is the way you catch
    cheaters. And the answer to that is no.
        Do we have the same procedures and standards in place for
    labs, and almost as important, the same contractual terms with
    labs so that you are paying the same price everywhere? Because,
    frankly, some of them do it on the cheap. And the answer is no
    and no. And they are also not, except for one lab in the United
    States, certified, and accredited to the same levels as the
    best labs around the world.
        Do we have the same processes for investigation, the same
    number of investigators around the country and the same
    adjudication processes? No, we don't.
        Do we have the same system of penalties and is there
    consistency in the application of those penalties, meaning,
    does the same offense in California result in the same penalty
    there as in Kentucky, as in Florida, as in New York? No.
        And do we have a system in place that can react quickly and
    uniformly around the Nation to address the latest drug problem
    that arises?
        Passage of this bill would address all those deficiencies
    by combining the world's best, the gold standard for anti-
    doping in the world, USADA, with State regulators, trainers,
    tracks, vets, jockeys, owners and breeders, both on the board
    of this private, self-regulatory organization, and in the
    committees, the standing committees that support its work.
        The legislation provides due-process guarantees to
    everybody in rules promulgation and adjudications, the ability
    to react quickly, forcefully, and nationwide, an avenue for
    partnering with State regulators to plug into their system by
    contract but all with the same processes, protocols, and rules.
    And most importantly, it is founded on the proposition that the
    regulatory authority should be controlled by independent
    persons with no conflicts of interest.
        No case better illustrates that point than what happened
    with the Triple Crown winner Justify, who had a positive drug
    test in the race in which he qualified for the Kentucky Derby
    that was later dismissed behind closed doors by the California
    Horse Racing Board. Thus, even one of the greatest achievements
    in modern racing was given a black eye by our current system.
        This bill represents true reform. That is why it is
    supported by key industry organizations, by jockeys, by many,
    many trainers and others, and animal welfare organizations.
    Many people in our industry believe that they are staring at
    the abyss, that we have to do something and have to do
    something now, and this bill represents the best path forward.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Lear follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
        And now, Dr. Anderson, you are welcome to take your 5
    minutes of testimony.

                 STATEMENT OF DR. KATHLEEN M. ANDERSON

        Dr. Anderson. Thank you, Chairman Schakowsky, Ranking
    Member McMorris Rodgers, and distinguished members of the
    subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before
    you today on behalf of the horse.
        My name is Dr. Kathleen Anderson, and I am an equine
    veterinarian who has practiced with Thoroughbred racehorses for
    34 years. For the past 27 years, I have owned and operated an
    equine veterinary practice based at the Fair Hill Training
    Center in Cecil County, Maryland, approximately two hours north
    of where we sit today. I am licensed in nine States and hold
    racing commission licenses in three states.
        I share this information with you today to make the point
    that I am engaged daily in the care of the Thoroughbred
    racehorse in training and competition and often throughout
    their second careers in other equestrian endeavors.
        How is this relevant to the legislation we are here to
    discuss today? As a volunteer who has served thousands of hours
    with equine industry groups beyond my daily practice, I am
    committed to being a voice for the horses I care for, the
    Thoroughbred racehorse. The health, welfare, and safety of the
    racehorse are my primary guiding mission as a veterinarian, as
    a citizen of the equine community, and as a leader within the
    racing community.
        Specific to this legislation, I served as the 2016
    president of the American Association of Equine Practitioners.
    I continue to serve on the AAEP Racing committee, which has
    been actively monitoring and evaluating this legislation. I am
    a co-author of the Mid-Atlantic Strategic Plan to reduce racing
    fatalities, and recently I endorsed the Thoroughbred Safety
    Coalition reforms at their inaugural announcement last fall.
        I tell you this to demonstrate that I am familiar with the
    intricacies and impacts of this legislation. I strongly support
    seeking and implanting solutions to racing industry challenges.
    The Jockey Club is to be commended on their commitment to the
    welfare of the Thoroughbreds during and after their racing
    careers, as evidenced by the many initiatives they have
    supported. The equine veterinarian's role is to bring
    expertise, knowledge, and commitment to racing industry
    initiatives directly impacting the horse.
        Uniformity, we can all agree, should be the holy grail of
    our efforts, for it is the glue that will bind all racing
    jurisdictions together, with cohesive policies, not just on
    medication such as this bill seeks to achieve, but on all
    matters impacting risk management of the racehorse. Uniform
    medication rules, enforcement and penalties, uniform laboratory
    testing, accreditation and interpretation, uniform regulatory
    veterinary duties, uniform track surface requirements, racing
    office policy and crop rules, uniform injury response, records
    and investigations.
        Many of these are included in the Mid-Atlantic Strategic
    Plan, which is an example of the work being done by
    collaborative racing stakeholders to fulfill the mandate of
    safety and welfare of the racehorse, while simultaneously
    ensuring the integrity and level playing field within our
    American racing environment.
        As a practicing veterinarian, I do have concerns that
    eliminating furosemide, the only allowed race-day medication,
    will not improve the safety and welfare of the racehorse. There
    is substantial documented science behind the safe and
    efficacious use of furosemide to prevent exercise-induced
    pulmonary hemorrhage, a respiratory condition common in elite
    athletes, including human athletes.
        EIPH can adversely impact racehorses not only in their
    current careers but also in their second careers. Studies done
    in the 1980s in Hong Kong by an international team of
    veterinarians examined the lungs on deceased racehorses to
    document the damage of the lung tissue of horses with EIPH.
    This provided strong physical evidence supporting the decision
    made 40 years ago to allow the administration of furosemide on
    race day based on what was best for the health of the
    racehorse.
        In my opinion, this bill could be improved with significant
    changes in the governance structure to include expanded
    veterinary expertise in several areas such as veterinary
    pharmacology and extensive experience in veterinary racetrack
    practice. The real need for uniformity expands beyond doping
    and medication. I believe the solutions lie in a unified racing
    stakeholder effort such as we have implemented in the mid-
    Atlantic with strong, multifaceted reforms.
        Thank you, and I look forward to answering your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Anderson follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you, Dr. Anderson.
        And now, Mr. De Francis, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

                   STATEMENT OF JOSEPH A. De FRANCIS

        Mr. De Francis. Thank you, Chair Schakowsky. Good morning.
    Good morning, Ranking Member Rodgers, Chairman Pallone, and
    members of the committee. My name is Joe De Francis, and it is
    a distinct privilege and a genuine pleasure to be with you this
    morning to discuss a matter of the utmost importance, not just
    to me personally, but to the industry that I love very, very
    dearly. And I want to thank you sincerely for the opportunity
    to be here today.
        I am here wearing multiple hats. As Chair Schakowsky
    mentioned in her introduction, I am very proud to be the
    national chairman of the Horseracing Advisory Council of the
    Humane Society of the United States and in that capacity, to
    speak on behalf of the animal welfare community.
        I was also the controlling shareholder and majority owner
    and chief executive officer of the Maryland Jockey Club for
    about two decades. The Maryland Jockey Club is the corporate
    parent entity of Pimlico Race Course, the home of the
    Preakness, the middle jewel of horseracing's Triple Crown, as
    well as Laurel Park, which is the closest major thoroughbred
    track to where we are sitting this morning in our Nation's
    capital. And so I also bring a businessman's perspective to
    this issue.
        Focusing on the animal welfare perspective, I think the
    moral and ethical imperatives are so self-evident that I don't
    need to take the subcommittee's time this morning to belabor
    them. I would just like to simply observe and echo the comments
    of my colleague, Mr. Irby, that while human athletes have a
    choice, human athletes have free will and can choose to
    endanger their health and welfare and safety to take
    performance-enhancing or pain-killing drugs, horses have no
    choice, they have no free will. They are completely dependent
    for their health, safety, and welfare on the ethics and the
    morals of the people who care for them.
        From a business perspective, it may seem rather strange to
    some of you that we, as business people, are here asking you,
    taking your time, to impose a new framework of Federal
    regulation on our business. I would imagine that doesn't happen
    very often, and it might appear kind of crazy to some of you,
    but I can assure you there is a method to our madness.
        Horseracing is unique in that it has no commissioner. We
    have no national office. Unlike football, baseball, basketball,
    and hockey, there is no Roger Goodell or Pete Rozelle. There is
    no Gary Bettman, Adam Silver, or David Stern.
        It is not that we don't want one. We have been trying for
    decades to have one. My colleague, Mr. Drazin, writes
    passionately in his prepared testimony how he has been working
    for 20 years to support a national office who is empowered--and
    those are the key words--who is empowered to regulate the
    business on a national basis?
        The problem is, because horseracing involves wagering, it
    has been pervasively regulated. Every aspect has been
    pervasively regulated on a State basis since horseracing's
    inception. This pervasive State regulation prevents us, as
    private business people, from voluntarily entering into any
    type of national coalition or national compact to empower one
    national office to set national rules that all the participants
    in the sport must abide by.
        We can't solve this problem by ourselves. We have been
    trying for decades. Every initiative has failed miserably. The
    pervasive State regulation works well in many aspects of the
    sport, but I don't think anyone can disagree that it has failed
    miserably when it comes to the critical issue of drugs and
    medications.
        Why is this so important to the business? Horseracing faces
    greater competition than ever before for the entertainment
    dollar. The proliferation of technology and forms of
    entertainment and wagering is exploding before our very eyes.
    Our greatest asset, our greatest weapon in this competition, is
    the athleticism and nobility, and majesty of the Thoroughbred
    racehorse.
        Survey after survey after survey has shown that not only
    the general public but our core fans are losing confidence to
    an increasing degree in our stewardship of the integrity of the
    sport and the fundamental integrity of our product, that we are
    doing our jobs properly and looking after the health and
    welfare and safety of these magnificent equine athletes that
    are the very foundation of our sport.
        You don't need a Ph.D. From a top ten business school to,
    know that if you lose the confidence not only of the general
    public but of your core customers in the basic product that you
    are offering, the invisible hand of the marketplace is going to
    drive your business into oblivion. You won't need to worry
    about remedies. The marketplace will take care of it, and you
    will be out of business, just as many businesses like Ringling
    Brothers Circus that failed to follow this principle of
    business 101 have suffered.
        So it is not an overdramatization and it is not an
    oversensationalizing to say that the very future of the
    industry, the survival of the business is at stake. As someone
    who has been a passionate fan of this sport since I was five
    years old, a time span now, Chair Schakowsky, I am sorry to
    say, extends over six decades, I really, really would
    respectfully request--in fact, I would implore you--to report
    favorably on H.R. 1754 at the earliest possible time.
        I thank you very much for your time and attention this
    morning, and I really welcome the opportunity to answer any
    questions that you might have. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. De Francis follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you very much, Mr. De Francis.
        And now, Mr. McCarron, we welcome your testimony for 5
    minutes.

                  STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER J. McCARRON

        Mr. McCarron. Good morning, and thank you, Chair----
        Ms. Schakowsky. Put your mike on. There we go.
        Mr. McCarron. I am sorry about that.
        Good morning, and thank you, Chair Schakowsky and Ranking
    Member Rodgers, and members of the committee, for inviting me
    here today. My name is Chris McCarron. I was a professional
    thoroughbred jockey for 28 years, from 1974 through 2002. I won
    7,141 races from over 34,000 mounts. And when I retired, I was
    the leading money earner in the sport's history. I won six
    Triple Crown races, including two Kentucky Derbies, and nine
    Breeders Cup races, and five coming in the Classic. I was
    inducted into the Hall of Fame in 1989 during my first year of
    eligibility.
        I am also a founding member of the Humane Society of the
    United States National Horseracing Advisory Council. I joined
    that council because I believe in the organization's animal
    welfare mission. The humane movement in American history was
    built around the protection of horses, and we have a deep
    responsibility to them. That is why I am here today.
        I support H.R. 1754 because horseracing as a sport has been
    in serious decline for years, and something must be done to
    curb this trend. I believe one of the reasons for this decline
    is the lack of public confidence in our product. Over the past
    few decades, medication violations--by this, I mean horses
    testing positive for banned substances and nonbanned substances
    in excess of permitted amounts--have escalated to the point of
    being unacceptable to our patrons and participants alike.
        When I began my career right here in Maryland in 1974, the
    average number of annual starts for a horse was 14. Today, the
    average number of career starts is 11. This stat alone has
    caused many of our horse owners to leave the sport and
    countless others to lose interest in becoming an owner. Racing
    simply cannot withstand this serious decline. Why would anyone,
    knowing these stats, want to become involved in racehorse
    ownership?
        Further, there are far too many horses suffering an injury
    to the point where their career has come to an early end. To
    borrow and adapt an old adage, medications don't kill horses;
    improper use of medications kill horses. Instead of giving the
    horse the rest it needs, the trainer relies on his or her
    veterinarian to administer medication to mask pain by reducing
    inflammation caused by an injury. I can tell you this for sure,
    horses' careers would last much longer if this practice were
    less prevalent.
        I should also say that I have a personal interest in seeing
    this bill passed. Far too many of my brethren, the active
    jockeys and exercise riders plying their trade on a daily
    basis, are being injured due to horses breaking down during
    racing or training. Seven years ago, the Journal of American
    Medical Association conducted a study that revealed 31--jockeys
    experienced 31 accidents per week.
        To be clear, this is a very dangerous occupation. More to
    the point, it has been reported to me by the Jockeys' Guild
    that on average, two jockeys die each year and two more are
    left paralyzed. Furthermore, there are currently over 60
    permanently disabled jockeys in the United States. The majority
    of these tragedies occur due to horses breaking down. Very
    often, these horses are racing with preexisting conditions that
    have been masked by medication.
        I can also tell you this: While riding, it is a truly
    helpless feeling, Madam Chair, that when a horse breaks down,
    it is a tragedy. If a jockey is lucky enough to survive the
    fall, the sorrow felt for the fate of the horse is the next
    weight to bear. When jockeys get on the horses, they aren't
    told the medical history. They aren't told whether the horses
    are completely sound. They aren't told whether a particular
    horse should be resting rather than racing. That is why I
    strongly support the Horseracing Integrity Act. This bill
    directly addresses one of the leading causes of breakdown.
        Right now, there are almost no controls on what therapeutic
    horses are--therapeutics horses are given while training. A
    substantial number of breakdowns happen on the training track
    in the mornings. This bill would significantly expand out-of-
    competition testing, which is below five percent of all tests
    for horses right now. By comparison, 60 percent of all tests of
    Olympic athletes are out of competition.
        There is something really wrong here, and I will tell you
    what it is. The status quo, with 38 different States governing
    one industry, with 38 different sets of rules and penalties,
    and numerous different laboratories doing the testing using
    different standards is just not working. It simply cannot go on
    if Thoroughbred racing is to continue to be a viable industry.
        Our racing industry provides over $15 billion annually to
    the American economy, while supporting nearly a quarter million
    jobs. That concerns me. Something must be done to stem the tide
    and stabilize an industry that is so vital to communities
    across the country. I sincerely hope that you give H.R. 1754
    the thumbs-up and give--and help the thoroughbred industry
    right this ship. It is sinking and we truly need your help.
        Thank you for inviting me to testify today.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. McCarron follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you very much.
        Now, Mr. Drazin, you are welcome to give your 5 minute
    opening statement.

                     STATEMENT OF DENNIS A. DRAZIN

        Mr. Drazin. Thank you.
        Chairwoman Schakowsky, Congresswoman Rodgers, Chairman
    Pallone, members of the committee, Congressman Tonko, thank you
    for your work on this.
        Unfortunately, I am opposed to H.R. 1754, and I want to
    explain why. I come from a background in horseracing, in
    addition to the other hats that I wear. I have owned horses,
    raised horses, bred horses, worked for the horsemen's
    associations, been their counsel, been their legislative
    counsel, been their president, ended up as chairman of the
    racing commission, served on a number of blue ribbon panels
    trying to help horseracing.
        I love horses. It is my passion. I want to protect horses.
    I want to do everything I can to get it right the first time,
    not pass a bill that I think goes a long way to help but
    doesn't go far enough.
        So what I am trying to do is come before you and explain to
    you the things that I think that need to be added in order to
    help preserve the health, safety, and welfare of our horses and
    our jockeys. So let me talk about a few things that are missing
    from this bill.
        The National Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association has worked
    very hard for the past six months trying to move forward with
    amendments to this bill that would be acceptable to the
    industry. And I have been in front of legislatures in our State
    a number of times. I think there is widespread support for this
    bill, and therefore, it makes more sense to me to try and amend
    this bill to get it right, instead of crafting a totally new
    bill and starting over again.
        The things that are missing from this bill that I think we
    need to add to make our horses safe and our jockeys protected
    would be to come together, which we are doing--we have met a
    number of times with a special committee of our
    representatives--to talk about racing environments that are as
    safe as any other surface in the world.
        Equine injury reporting and prevention protocols that bring
    the United States of America racing injuries and fatalities in
    line with international injury statistics.
        Safe and consistent racing surfaces through scientific
    monitoring and maintenance.
        Uniform equine medication and testing standards, including
    a significant increase in out-of-competition testing, because
    that is where you are going to catch the cheaters. We do a lot
    of tests post race, but you will catch more people with out-of-
    competition testing.
        Regulatory transparency and nationwide portability of
    veterinary records. Everybody should know what preexisting
    problems these horses have.
        You know, H.R. 1754 is not going to accomplish everything
    we need. We need crop rules that demonstrate the industry's
    commitment to humane treatment of horses, and it has got to be
    the same from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. You can't have
    different jurisdictions all having different rules.
        And for these horses that we love, we need after-care
    policies that ensure homes and second careers for all
    Thoroughbreds.
        And I think in order to come up with a comprehensive bill,
    the industry has been working very hard. And I am opposed to
    Federal legislation. I don't think Federal legislation should
    be in our business. And Mr. De Francis is right; for 20 years,
    I have said we need to be like a real sports league. We need to
    be like the NFL, the NBA, Major League Baseball. We need a
    commissioner who is empowered, and he is right, that is the key
    word: empowered. But we haven't been able to accomplish that.
        And although I have been opposed to Federal legislation, I
    want to be part of the solution, not part of the problem in
    preventing this. So I have worked hard with my colleagues on
    the NTRA special committee to come up with comprehensive
    solutions for you, and these are complicated. We have addressed
    issues such as potential constitutional challenges to the bill.
    I am sure all of you are familiar with the 6-year process I
    just lived through on sports betting in this country, where the
    Supreme Court finally overturned PASPA and held it
    unconstitutional. There will be a challenge to this bill. The
    funding is misguided.
        There are racetracks that pay a lot of money to make horses
    safe, to make the track safe, to do drug testing, and at the
    end of the day, I think that what you need to understand is
    there are many segments of our industry that pay nothing to
    contribute to this. You have ADWs; you have OTWs.
        And I know my time is up. I am just going to mention one
    thing. It starts when these horses are born. You need to look
    at the medications they are getting as young horses. We had a
    problem with biophosphates, which finally we understood that
    these make the horses weak and their bones are frail. So we
    addressed those.
        Yes, I am finished. Thank you very much.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Drazin follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you very much.
        So we have concluded witness opening statements. At this
    time, we will move to member questions. Each member will have 5
    minutes to question our witnesses. That is a total, question
    and response. And I will start by recognizing myself for 5
    minutes. I do have a number of questions, so I hope that the
    responses can be concise.
        Racehorses in the United States are injured at a much
    higher rate than the rest of the horseracing world, resulting
    in nearly 500 horse deaths in the United States every year. One
    of the keys in stopping injuries and deaths is establishing
    standards for drug policy.
        So, Mr. Irby, many say the use of medication on race-day
    contributes to the injuries that we are seeing. Would you see
    fewer--would we see fewer horse injuries if race day use of
    medicine were banned?
        Mr. Irby. Yes, Chair Schakowsky, I do believe that we
    would. The death rate in the U.S. is 2-1/2 times greater than
    that of the rest of the world. And they do not allow the use of
    medication on race day. So we are at the bottom of the barrel,
    along with Canada, in that aspect.
        Ms. Schakowsky. So why does a 24-hour period in a race
    really matter?
        Mr. Irby. Well, I think that is more of a scientific
    question. I am not sure that I could fully answer that, but I
    would say that there are horses that are trained on some drugs
    and raced on some other drugs. I think that leaves time for
    those drugs to leave their system, for the most part.
        Ms. Schakowsky. Mr. Lear, horseracing is governed by 38
    different racing jurisdictions which can each adopt their own
    drug policy. Is this current approach working?
        Mr. Lear. Not at all. Not at all. And it is not just an
    issue of different rules, different investigations, the whole
    thing that I went through. It is how they adopt the changes
    they make. Some of them do it by statute, as in Florida. Some
    of them do it by lengthy State regulatory processes, as is the
    norm in California. Others do it in different ways. So it ends
    up being a complete patchwork that is never going to be this--
    even if the uniformity were achieved, it would be ephemeral,
    because the next change would have to go through the same
    gauntlet of different processes.
        Ms. Schakowsky. And for you again, the bill also
    establishes third-party enforcement for creating and
    implementing an industrywide anti-doping program. Why is a new
    organization needed?
        Mr. Lear. It is needed because the existing system is so
    fragmented that it can't speak with one voice and act
    uniformly. In the areas that this bill addresses, it would
    replace the existing multiplicity of systems with one system,
    and that system would be able to act in the way that I
    suggested.
        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
        And, Mr. Irby, the bill aims to set a uniform list of
    substances and treatments that are allowed and those that are
    prohibited on race day. How will this help to protect our
    horses?
        Mr. Irby. Well, I think that will help the--the bill would
    provide flexibility in the regulations that would come forward
    that would enable issues related to horses that actually do
    require certain medications under certain circumstances.
        Ms. Schakowsky. And, Mr. Irby, why is uniformity across the
    United States necessary?
        Mr. Irby. Well, it is necessary because there are 38 or so
    racing jurisdictions now with a different set of rules, and a
    multitude of different regulations, and it is a patchwork. So
    trainers that might have an infraction in one State may go on
    suspension and, particularly in the Northeast, where there are
    so many States that are close together, they can just pack up
    and go to another State and race horses at a different track in
    another State and don't really serve that much of a consequence
    for their actions.
        Ms. Schakowsky. Got it. Mr. Irby, the Horseracing Integrity
    Act would apply protections to the major breeds of racehorses
    in the United States. That would include Thoroughbreds and
    Standardbreds and Quarter Horses. Why is it so important to
    ensure all of these major breeds are protected?
        Mr. Irby. Well, I think all horses are, first and foremost,
    equally important no matter what breed they are and where they
    are racing and what type of racing, but there are also a
    multitude of different types of racing that occur at the same
    track or several tracks at the same location. There may be
    Thoroughbred or Quarter Horse racing, where there is also
    harness racing. So you want uniformity across those tracks
    across the U.S.
        Ms. Schakowsky. I thank you, and I yield back.
        And the Chair recognizes Mrs. Rodgers, subcommittee ranking
    member, for 5 minutes to ask questions.
        Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you
    everyone, for being here today.
        Mr. Martin, would you explain the current regulatory
    framework that governs horseracing and how H.R. 1754 will
    impact it?
        Mr. Martin. I thank you for the question. Let me--in
    addressing this; I am sitting here in shock as to the lack of
    depth of knowledge as to what is currently going on. There have
    been a statement here about a trainer who can get a violation
    and pack up and just go to the next State. That is not true.
    The regulatory jurisdictions that are members of the ARCI have
    agreed to reciprocity. So if they are suspended and sanctioned
    in one State, it carries over to the next State. If you are
    excluded in New York, you are not allowed to participate in New
    Jersey, Pennsylvania, State of Washington; it doesn't matter.
        There has also been statements with regard to the extent to
    which horses are running with pain-masking medications. We
    conduct an extensive drug-testing program. The numbers are in
    my written statement. If that statement were true, we would be
    seeing it. Our clear rate--because we test for that--our clear
    rate is comparable to the clear rate in the WADA labs
    worldwide, as well as the USADA lab.
        Do people do that? Yes, they do. And we do detect them. But
    our clear rate, of all the labs worldwide, in any sport, is
    about 99.4 or -5 percent, depending on the sport. And while we
    do see a lot of overages of therapeutic medications, it is a
    small percentage of all of the horses that are tested.[11:30
    a.m.]
        Mr. Martin. But to create that as the image of what is
    going on is inaccurate to the facts that are there.
        Mrs. Rodgers. I have a couple more questions.
        Mr. Martin. I am sorry.
        Mrs. Rodgers. If we can--yep. Yep. OK? So do you want to
    just talk about how you believe 1754 will impact the current
    regulatory framework?
        Mr. Martin. I think it duplicates a framework that is
    already in existence. I think the goal of trying to get to
    uniformity is a very good goal. We believe there is substantial
    uniformity but not total uniformity with regard to----
        Mrs. Rodgers. All right.
        Mr. Martin [continuing]. The testing in the labs.
        Mrs. Rodgers. OK.
        Mr. Martin. The labs are accredited.
        Mrs. Rodgers. OK.
        Mr. Martin. And we think you can achieve uniformity by
    adopting the ARCI model rules, which is the----
        Mrs. Rodgers. OK.
        Mr. Martin [continuing]. Basis for everybody.
        Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you. I am going to wrap it up there.
        Mr. Lear, would you explain why you believe the Federal
    Government needs to create an independent entity to develop and
    administer an anti-doping and medication program for your
    sport?
        Mr. Lear. Yes. We start with the fact that the current
    system is not working and is not protecting our horses. We
    agree that the rate of deaths and injuries is unacceptable. And
    having tried the other ways, once collaboratively within the
    industry in this program called NUMP, and having tried with an
    interstate compact, which is the other way we can lawfully work
    together, and those having failed, at the end of the day, this
    is our choice. There are----
        Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you.
        Mr. Lear [continuing]. Other examples of this type thing.
        Mrs. Rodgers. OK. Thank you.
        Dr. Anderson, if enacted, H.R. 1754 would ban all
    medications from being administered 24 hours before a race,
    which includes Lasix.
        Can you explain why Lasix is administered on race day? And,
    if banned, what alternative methods would be used to treat EIPH
    in horseraces?
        Dr. Anderson. Well, currently, as you said, Lasix is given
    at approximately four hours prior to racing. It is a very
    controlled amount, meaning the same dose. It is transparent in
    the programs; everybody knows it is going on.
        But why would it--the question was?
        Mrs. Rodgers. Why is it administered on race day, and what
    would the alternative methods be?
        Dr. Anderson. Well, as far as I can tell, there are no
    alternative methods other than managing the horse
    metabolically, which would be pulling the water in advance,
    this type of thing.
        I think my best answer is to tell you how we have a number
    of horses come to the United States from Europe and other
    places where they are not able to manage EIPH using management
    techniques.
        Mrs. Rodgers. OK. Thank you.
        A final question would just be: Are there any concerns
    about having the Federal Trade Commission oversee this type of
    program? Would anybody want to address that? Is there anyone on
    the panel that has concerns about the FTC overseeing--OK?
        Mr. Martin?
        Mr. Martin. We have a problem with a Federal agency that
    really doesn't have any veterinary expertise being in the
    position of being the ultimate rule-maker.
        And one of the--I don't want to sound like a broken
    record--one of the reasons why we are pressing for the
    incorporation of the ARCI model rules by reference is because
    they are the cumulative effect of a prolonged process involving
    veterinarians, researchers, scientists, affected constituencies
    in the industry, as well as independent regulators.
        Mrs. Rodgers. OK. Thank you very much.
        My time has expired. I yield back. Thank you.
        Ms. Schakowsky. The gentle lady yields back.
        And I recognize Congresswoman Castor for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Castor. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today.
        Looking into this issue, I was surprised at how many of the
    fatal horse injuries are tied to a preexisting minor injury. I
    saw information from the California Horse Racing Board that 90
    percent of fatal horse injuries are tied to minor preexisting
    injuries like microfractures in the bone. And then you think
    about the stress of this over-1,000-pound horse sprinting at 40
    miles per hour. That would turn a minor injury into something
    that is catastrophic and ultimately leads to that horse's
    death.
        That is why I think focusing on the pre-race detection and
    appropriate treatment for these injuries will be so important.
    I know that medications are administered to ease discomfort and
    reduce inflammation and that these medications probably mask
    the injuries, and that makes that pre-race detection much more
    difficult.
        I wonder, Mr. McCarron and Mr. De Francis, how prevalent is
    the use of pain medication in horseracing? And is that
    contributing to the high rate of deaths?
        Mr. De Francis. The short answer to your question,
    Congresswoman, is, yes, it is very prevalent, and it is the
    major factor that contributes to the high rate of deaths.
        The challenge that we face is that virtually every
    medication, by its very definition, has therapeutic qualities
    and has negative, health-endangering or performance-enhancing
    qualities.
        Lasix is a great example. Lasix is very therapeutic for
    that small percentage of the horses that have a propensity, a
    genetic propensity, to suffer from exercise-induced pulmonary
    hemorrhaging, EIPH. And it is administered on those horses. It
    has the therapeutic effect of allowing them to race where they
    otherwise would not be able to do so.
        The problem is that the number of horses that suffer from
    that malady is a small percentage of the overall racing
    population, yet virtually 100 percent of the horses' race on
    it. Why? The other 94 percent that doesn't need it to solve
    EIPH are using it as a performance enhancer because it flushes
    20 pounds of water weight out of their system and allows them
    to race with less weight and, thus, run faster.
        The problem is you have a 90-plus percentage of horses
    racing in a dehydrated state. You don't need to be a medical
    doctor to understand the negative impacts of that.
        All of these issues--the reason why USADA is so critical to
    this bill is not because of the medications and drugs that
    exist today but because of the medications and drugs that are
    being developed right now, mostly in human labs for human
    applications that are then transmitted to equine applications,
    that mask pain, that have a whole variety of potentially
    therapeutic impacts but could also be used in a way that is
    very damaging and dangerous to the horse's health and safety.
        It is a balancing test, a balancing act that needs to be
    done on a regular basis, on an ongoing basis into the future.
    There is no organization that is better qualified in the world
    to conduct that balancing than USADA. They have the greatest--
    they are acknowledged worldwide as having the greatest
    repository of having scientific knowledge and expertise
    anywhere in the world.
        Most importantly, despite the best intentions of racing
    commissions around the country in various States, the many
    racing commissioners are subject to the tug and pull of
    different kinds of conflicts. They are responsible for all
    other aspects of the sport. USADA is completely independent.
    They would have no conflicts whatsoever, and no other
    motivations other than what is in the best interests of the
    health, welfare, and safety of the equine athlete.
        Ms. Castor. OK.
        Mr. McCarron, do you agree with that?
        Mr. McCarron. Yes, I certainly do.
        And I have personal experience with Lasix. As a jockey, I
    had to work hard to watch my weight throughout my career, and
    there was a period of time when I resorted to taking Lasix on a
    daily basis. And I have to tell you how horrible it feels,
    trying to be an athlete and perform in a dehydrated fashion.
        If I walk into the jockeys room and I get on the scale and
    I weigh 115 pounds stripped, I have to go get in the hot box
    and pull three or four pounds in order to be able to get my
    weight down to the weight that has been assigned for that horse
    to carry. And the other measures are--taking Lasix is another
    very--laxatives are very--they used to be prominent but not so
    much anymore. But it is very easy to pop a Lasix pill and go
    ahead and shed three or four pounds of water weight. And I will
    tell you what: It takes its toll on the rider towards the end
    of the day. You feel exhausted.
        Ms. Castor. Thank you.
        Ms. Schakowsky. And now I recognize the ranking member on
    the subcommittee, Mr. Walden, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Walden. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And my
    apologies for not being here----
        Ms. Schakowsky. Not on the subcommittee----
        Mr. Walden. The full.
        Ms. Schakowsky. On the full committee.
        Mr. Walden. That is all right. We will take it. Thank you.
        We had another hearing going on about wildfires and safety
    of the power lines and everything going on downstairs, so I
    have been at that one.
        But I did want to come up here, because I wanted to extend
    a warm welcome to all of you for being here. Protecting the
    health of horses is important to all of us in this room, and we
    know it evokes pretty strong passions and that we all want to
    do what is right. We may have some disagreements on what that
    is, and that is what brings us here today.
        And, you know, in my district, I have all of eastern
    Oregon. We have 50,000 people come to the great Pendleton
    Round-Up, one of the great rodeos of all time. You are all
    welcome, by the way. It is in September. We will see you there.
    But we also have small rodeos as well. And so the life and
    health of horses and all animals are part of our culture in
    eastern Oregon.
        Last Congress, we had a similar hearing on similar
    legislation. Then, it was H.R. 2651, the Horseracing Integrity
    Act of 2017, and discussed many of the issues that you all have
    been discussing today.
        Since that time, of course, tragically, we have lost 13
    horses at Santa Anita. I understand that probably didn't have
    anything to do with Lasix necessarily but, again, it is about
    the welfare of the horses. So we appreciate your input.
        Mr. Lear, I have a couple of questions----
        Mr. Lear. Yes.
        Mr. Walden [continuing]. That I would like to address to
    you.
        Please address Mr. Drazin's concern--and I heard it when I
    came in--that the Horseracing Integrity Act, if passed, might
    face constitutional challenges. Do you believe this bill is
    constitutional? If so, why?
        Mr. Lear. Yes, I do. And we worked--I am a lawyer, but we--
    --
        Mr. Walden. I won't hold that against you.
        Mr. Lear. That is perfectly fine. I am still recovering.
        We involved some really sophisticated constitutional
    lawyers. We were aware of the PASPA litigation before it was
    decided. We took a hard look at this to make sure we didn't run
    afoul of anti-commandeering. We have tailored the bill not to
    run afoul of issues relating to delegation. We have continued
    to follow the Supreme Court's positions on various of the
    issues, and we are confident that it would withstand a
    constitutional challenge.
        Mr. Walden. All right. And, of course, none of us would
    know until it goes to court and the judges rule, but we
    appreciate--I wanted to make sure you had a chance to respond.
        And I would also like you to respond to Mr. Martin's
    argument that the bill does not address the gaping hole that he
    cited, namely horses not under the jurisdiction of a government
    agency. Would H.R. 1754 solve that, in your opinion?
        Mr. Lear. In some ways, it would, because it would have the
    ability to look back at horses coming into racing.
        Bisphosphonates is an example of a medication that has
    recently come to light and gotten a lot of attention. I will
    say that there are entities within the industry that reacted
    very quickly to that. The Thoroughbred sales companies--one of
    my other hats is as a trustee of Keeneland, and we moved very
    quickly to adopt standards that would allow the testing for
    bisphosphonates at the sale. And we sell as early as
    yearlings--I mean, as weanlings, which is even before their
    first year, which it takes it very far back. You can reject it
    if is a positive test.
        And, by the way, one thing I want to say about that: If the
    rest of the industry cooperated like the sales companies do in
    having the same rules of the game, we probably wouldn't be
    sitting here today.
        Mr. Walden. Right.
        And I have been told the cost of implementing H.R. 1754
    would require the Standardbred horseracing industry and the
    Thoroughbred horseracing industry to pay unequal amounts. And I
    wondered if you could speak to that.
        Mr. Lear. I am not sure about the source of that
    information. The way in which all of our estimates of cost have
    been put together is to look at the total number of starts, the
    total number of horses, and what is currently being spent
    today. So, in our estimates, we have blended it together----
        Mr. Walden. All right.
        Mr. Lear [continuing]. And I have not heard that particular
    criticism.
        Mr. Walden. That takes care of that one.
        Dr. Anderson, thank you for being here.
        In your testimony, you mentioned the therapeutic-use
    exemption allows an athlete in the Olympics to compete in
    competition under the influence of an otherwise banned
    performance-enhancing substance. So my question is: If this
    bill were enacted, all medications, including therapeutic
    drugs, would be banned. So as a veterinarian, is that
    concerning? Is that something we should be concerned about?
        Dr. Anderson. That is concerning, although my understanding
    is that the bill would accommodate for appropriate withdrawal
    periods. However, I think that--I would like to just address
    some of the statements here, which are regarding Lasix, for
    example.
        Mr. Walden. Yes.
        Dr. Anderson. That has no scientific evidence as being
    detrimental to a horse's welfare, and I think that we confuse
    sometimes that medication with illicit doping.
        Mr. Walden. All right. Thank you for that.
        Madam Chair, thanks for your courtesy. My time is expired.
    I yield back.
        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
        And I now yield to Congresswoman Kelly for 5 minutes for
    questions.
        Ms. Kelly. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you to all of
    the witnesses.
        Mr. Martin, I want to go back to the Los Angeles County
    District Office's recently concluded investigation. What do you
    think those investigations tell us about medication overall in
    the horsing industry--horseracing industry?
        Mr. Martin. One of the things that--the reason why we are
    proposing that the horses be tracked from the minute they are
    registered and the veterinary records be deposited with either
    a government agency or an NGO on a national basis is because we
    need to understand what is going on with those horses. And I
    think what--the district attorney's investigation pretty much
    reaffirmed the concern that we have as an organization.
        Drugs in society play a necessary role. They keep us
    healthy. They make us healthy when we are sick, but they can be
    abused just as they are in humans. We feel--and with all due
    respect to my friend, Mr. Lear, who talked about what is in the
    bill, we feel we need to have that information. When those
    horses show up under the jurisdiction of the regulatory agency,
    the regulatory vet can pull up their entire medical record, and
    that those horses have been flagged if they have had any kind
    of condition throughout their career.
        Just as if any one of us were diagnosed with cancer--my
    wife is a cancer survivor. When she was diagnosed 20 years ago,
    they followed her very closely, and that is what we need to do
    to these horses.
        Ms. Kelly. And they made several recommendations to improve
    safety and reduce fatalities. I am assuming you agree with
    these safety concerns. And are there more recommendations that
    you would recommend? And have these concerns been adopted
    across the--or these suggestions been adopted across the
    country?
        Mr. Martin. I would need to review that and answer that for
    the record.
        Ms. Kelly. OK. And in addition to the issues around the use
    of medication, do you think improving protocols for identifying
    preexisting conditions and track maintenance would improve
    overall safety for horses and jockeys?
        Mr. Martin. Absolutely, Congresswoman.
        Ms. Kelly. And to our retired jockey, do you feel there is
    more that we can do to make the industry safer for jockeys?
        Mr. McCarron. Oh, yes, I certainly do. I think that, if I
    had my way, it would be just hay, oats, and water. Simply put,
    I think an athlete that does not have a say-so in what
    medications are administered cannot protect itself. I think
    that--I think horses' careers would last longer if they were
    trained and raised on nothing but hay, oats, and water.
        I joined WHOA as a member on May 19 of 2014, and I firmly
    believe that a trainer, if he has got enough knowledge, enough
    talent to train horses, should have the ability to get the job
    done without any medication, other than when a horse--obviously
    other than when a horse becomes ill. You certainly need to take
    the measures to protect the horse's health that way.
        But as far as their legs are concerned, they are going
    across the ground at 40 miles an hour carrying anywhere from
    900 to 1,200 pounds, and if something is amiss--it was stated
    earlier that preexisting conditions include microfractures.
    Well, those microfractures become real fractures when a beast
    of that size is getting across the ground so quickly, carrying
    120 pounds on its back. They are very susceptible to injury
    already, and if they have anything that is preexisting
    whatsoever, it will come out; that is for sure.
        Ms. Kelly. Mr. Irby, did you want to comment on that?
        Mr. Irby. I think that no athlete, as Mr. McCarron said,
    that does not have a choice in the matter should be given
    drugs, like our human athletes do. It is about the health and,
    the safety and the welfare of the horse, and if they are in
    pain, they can't tell you they are in pain necessarily. They
    don't have the ability to speak to us, so, really and truly,
    there is no way to actually know, when you are giving a horse
    certain medications, if it is actually causing pain or
    alleviating the pain.
        Ms. Kelly. And, Mr. McCarron, I was asking about--I note
    the horse is healthy and safe, then that leads to the jockey.
    But anything we should be doing for the jockeys, any
    regulations that should be different for your health and safety
    besides the horse?
        Mr. McCarron. Well, as Mr. Drazin had mentioned earlier, I
    am interested in how the regulations and rules are going to
    apply to the use of the crop. That has nothing to do with the
    horse's health, but as far as measures to further protect the
    jockeys, the key is running sound horses and riding sound
    horses. That is the key.
        Ms. Kelly. Thank you so much. And thanks to all the
    witnesses. And I yield back.
        Ms. Schakowsky. Mr. Carter, you are recognized for 5
    minutes for questions.
        Mr. Carter. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank all of you
    for being here. It is certainly an important subject.
        Dr. Anderson, I want to start with you, and I want to ask
    you: Is furosemide--I know it is used to treat exercise-induced
    pulmonary hemorrhaging? Is it used for any other reasons?
        Let me ask you this: Is it administered for any other
    reason aside from that?
        Dr. Anderson. No, it is not.
        Mr. Carter. So that is the only reason it is administered?
        Dr. Anderson. Yes, only reason.
        Mr. Carter. It does have other effects.
        Dr. Anderson. It has a diuretic effect, and that would be
    the only effect.
        Mr. Carter. OK. And what kind--does that give a horse an
    advantage of any type, a diuretic effect? I mean, if a horse
    loses 20 to 30 pounds after the administration of--I am a
    pharmacist, so I am familiar with furosemide, and I know what
    it does, and I know that it is used to treat edema, used to
    treat hypertension, and that you remove fluid from the body,
    which makes it----
        Dr. Anderson. That would typically----
        Mr. Carter [continuing]. Easier for the blood to flow.
        Dr. Anderson. That would typically be given for a scenario
    where you actually had pathology in place. So these are horses
    that are--they are only treated with Lasix on race day. Those
    pathologies are not in place because they have had their pre-
    race exam, et cetera.
        But I do think that the important thing to know is there is
    no science that is reliable that relates EIPH--or the treatment
    of furosemide to performance enhancing. It allows them to
    perform to their ability because it removes the--well, it
    doesn't remove; it ameliorates the EIPH syndrome.
        Mr. Carter. If you take 20 to 30 pounds of fluid off of a
    horse, can they run faster?
        Dr. Anderson. I don't know the answer to that, and I'm not
    sure that anybody does. In humans, that is correct, but, for
    example, where I practice, we ship to seven different States on
    any given day, and those horses are all going to be losing
    weight just shipping.
        Mr. Carter. Doctor, I am----
        Dr. Anderson. Now, that's not----
        Mr. Carter [continuing]. Not a veterinarian----
        Dr. Anderson. Right.
        Mr. Carter [continuing]. But common sense would tell me
    that, if you take 20 to 30 pounds off of an animal, they are
    going to perform----
        Dr. Anderson. That is common sense, but that is not
    science, and that is all I am trying to speak from.
        Mr. Carter. OK. OK. So when is furosemide administered
    typically?
        Dr. Anderson. Four hours pre-race.
        Mr. Carter. Is that allowed under the current system?
        Dr. Anderson. Yes, it is. Yes, it is.
        Mr. Carter. Is it allowed anywhere else outside of North
    America?
        Dr. Anderson. Canada.
        Mr. Carter. Which is North America.
        Dr. Anderson. Sorry. Yes. I am Canadian too.
        Mr. Carter. That is scientific, but, nevertheless--I am
    sorry. Is the use of furosemide allowed anywhere outside of
    North America?
        Dr. Anderson. Not on race day. It is used during training
    extensively overseas, and in any of those----
        Mr. Carter. Why is that?
        Dr. Anderson. You know, I think the thing to back up to is
    why do we use it. We use it to assist with protecting our
    horses from exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage, and I think
    one of the things that everybody recognizes is that Lasix,
    furosemide, has the ability to decrease the incidence of that
    during horses at high speed.
        Mr. Carter. OK. Mr. McCarron, thank you for being here. We
    are just delighted that you are here, and I am excited to have
    a Hall of Fame jockey here. But I want to ask you----
        Mr. McCarron. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Carter [continuing]. Could this legislation that we are
    considering today, could it--what would it mean for the safety
    of jockeys if we were to implement this?
        Mr. McCarron. Nothing but purely sound horses would be
    competing.
        And if I may just briefly address the can a horse run
    faster with 20 to 30 pounds less? Very often, or quite
    occasionally, a horse will drop the rider leaving the starting
    gate and get loose, and more often than not, that horse will
    run around the track and be in front because he is not carrying
    120 pounds. So a diminished amount of weight in the horse will
    allow them to run faster, without question.
        Mr. Carter. Hence, that is why we don't see any jockeys
    over 200 pounds, right?
        Mr. McCarron. Right. Yes.
        Mr. Carter. OK. OK. All right. I have got one last
    question, and this one is to you, Mr. Martin. I have sat here
    during this hearing, and I hear you say that, you know, the
    current system is fine and we don't--and we may need to tweak
    it some. Why are we having all these horses dying if we don't
    need to implement something like this? I mean, it would be
    irresponsible for us to sit up here as Members of Congress and
    ignore the fact that we have had all these horses dying. Why
    are they dying?
        Mr. Martin. Congressman, I am not here to say that the
    existing system is fine. In my opening statement and in my
    written statement, I basically called for a major expansion of
    the regulatory authority over horses that does not actually
    exist today, and I think that that is necessary to basically be
    able to track those horses, to keep the at-risk horses off the
    racetrack.
        It is the preexisting conditions. It is the things that we
    don't know about that are causing these horses to die. And the
    more information you put in the hand of that regulatory
    veterinarian--I was brought into the State of New Mexico for
    the attorney general who did an investigation about a jockey
    that had died crossing the finish line as the horse broke down
    at one of the Quarter Horse tracks.
        And when I went through all the vet records, when I went
    through every piece of paper at the racing commission, at the
    racetrack, at the vet records, the thing that hit me is that
    this horse had conditions that nobody knew about. So if those
    vet records were centrally warehoused--and I tell you, if that
    were my brother that died, I would have--I am not even going to
    go there. But that is the hole in the regulatory scheme, and we
    need to talk about that.
        Mr. Carter. Well, my time is up, and I am sorry it is up,
    because this is--I will be quite honest with you. I was really
    not looking forward to this, but as I sat through this hearing,
    this has been fascinating. We need to address this. This needs
    to be addressed.
        Thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield back.
        Ms. Schakowsky. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Cardenas is recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Cardenas. Thank you, Chairwoman Schakowsky, and thank
    you for hosting this very important hearing.
        Some of the folks in this whole process have a voice, and
    some of the participants in this process have no voice, and we
    need to do our best to be a voice for everyone to make some
    commonsense legislation.
        I just want to point out so I don't forget, I just have a
    little side note. Apparently, 2-1/2 times--there is a 2-1/2
    times higher rate of racehorse deaths in the United States
    versus other parts of the country--excuse me, the world. So,
    obviously, there are things that we can do better here in the
    United States that perhaps human beings, whether you call them
    regulators, legislators, kings, or whoever runs those
    countries, they seem to be focused a little bit better, more
    accurately on at least the livelihood of the horses and their
    safety more than we are here. So we have a lot of work to do in
    America.
        The American Horse Council published a study in 2017 on the
    economic impact of horseracing, and in California, the
    horseracing industry reports over 10,000 direct jobs and adds
    over $870 million in direct value to the State's economy. I am
    proud to have some of these equine-serving businesses in my
    district, but in recent decades, horseracing has struggled.
        In 2002, apparently there was $15 billion that was bet on
    Thoroughbred races in the United States, and in 2018, that fell
    down to about $11 billion. In 2002, nearly 33,000 young horse--
    racehorses were registered, and last year, that number fell to
    about 19,900.
        This year alone, five horses have died at Santa Anita
    Racetrack, which is near my district in California. And
    according to an investigation by a task force created last year
    by the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office, 56 horses
    have died from July 1, 2018, through November 30, 2019. And as
    a Member of Congress, I think I have a responsibility to
    represent all of my constituents, including those that do not
    have a voice, and make sure that we are making good, sound
    decisions and making sure that our society is working in the
    right vein for everyone involved.
        Speaking as a former business owner myself, if you want the
    horseracing industry to survive and succeed, then we need to
    win back the trust of the people, and the industry must put the
    health of horses at the top of our priority list.
        And I have a quick question for Mr. McCarron. What
    languages are likely spoken in the back stretch? They call it
    the backstretch, the people who work with the horses all day
    and the people behind the scenes.
        Mr. McCarron. Yes, sir, we call it the back stretch--back
    side, back stretch.
        Mr. Cardenas. Is there more than one language spoken there
    often?
        Mr. McCarron. It is predominantly Hispanic.
        Mr. Cardenas. Yes. So what languages do they tend to speak?
    Spanish?
        Mr. McCarron. Yes.
        Mr. Cardenas. Yes. The reason why I ask that question is
    because I just want to show my respect to the invisible people
    in this industry, people who work really, really long hours,
    people who are true, true professionals, and I believe that
    every single one of them love, love these horses very much. I
    know that when my father--when I saw him get on the horse later
    on in his life, he became a different person. It took him back
    to the days when he grew up on a horse.
        So much respect to the people who dedicate their time and
    energy to the well-being of these horses. They are not
    scientists, they don't have degrees, they don't speak from a
    point of science, but they sure as heck know what the heck they
    are doing, and I just want to throw my respect to them.
        Mr. Drazin, to what extent have concerns about the safety
    of horseracing affected the sport's popularity? And do you
    agree--I am sorry. Go ahead, Mr. Drazin.
        Mr. Drazin. Certainly. This past year has been difficult
    for our industry. There were 35-plus breakdowns at Santa Anita
    Racetrack, in your backyard.
        Mr. Cardenas. Yes.
        Mr. Drazin. And I am hear to tell you today that those
    breakdowns had nothing to do with Lasix, had nothing to do with
    medication. They had to do with the safety issues relative to
    Santa Anita Racetrack, and that is where they need to address
    this. PETA has had a big voice. And the problem in the past has
    been we in the industry knew that horses break down, hopefully
    less and less, but they do break down. But it has become a
    public relations nightmare with what has happened.
        Mr. Cardenas. When you say breakdown, you mean they die?
        Mr. Drazin. They die.
        Mr. Cardenas. OK.
        Mr. Drazin. Some broke down----
        Mr. Cardenas. I hope that when I break down, people don't
    refer to me as I broke down. I think, with all due respect, I
    think that plays down the fact of the matter is that we lost a
    life.
        And my time is up, sir, so I yield back.
        Mr. Drazin. Well, if I could summarize an answer.
        Mr. Cardenas. It is up to the Chair. I am sorry. It is up
    to the Chair.
        Mr. Drazin. May I answer the question?
        Ms. Schakowsky. No. His time is up. That is how it works.
        I am going to--I am going to call on Mr. Soto and then Mr.
    Tonko, and then I am going to ask--I will do it now--unanimous
    consent to break the rules.
        [Discussion off the record.]
        Ms. Schakowsky. So I guess how we will do it, so that I am
    not totally delinquent but allowing you to speak, we will
    immediately reconvene a second panel, at which time the
    cosponsor of this legislation can speak. I ask unanimous
    consent to do that.
        Hearing no objection, that is what we are going to do.
        OK. And so now, Mr. Soto.
        Mr. Soto. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        In preparation for this hearing, I was looking at the
    history of horseracing, and it is really amazing. Six thousand
    years of domestication, 4,500 years where we have had
    horseracing. I mean, that is a long time, and it shows the
    special relationship between humans and horses.
        In Florida, it is really popular. Tampa Bay Downs, Hialeah,
    Gulf Stream, Pensacola, and there is even a horseracing culture
    in Ocala and Palm Beach in the State of Florida. In my own
    area, in central Florida, we have the Florida Cracker Horse,
    not known for its speed, but it does carry a lot of ranchers
    around and has its origin among the Spanish many years ago.
        But we see advancing technology and advancing
    pharmaceuticals and different techniques that are a threat to
    the sport. We saw it before in baseball and in the Olympics,
    and now in horseracing. And I can't imagine how much the
    temptation is when it is such an expensive sport, when there is
    so much invested in these horses and so much money at stake,
    but at the end of the day, people enjoy the sport because it is
    hard-fought, and it has to be fair, so that when we see someone
    cross the finish line, it means something; it is not just
    because they found some way to get around the rules.
        I applaud both Representative Tonko and Representative Barr
    for putting forward a bipartisan bill to ensure the integrity
    of this popular sport that is really important to Floridians.
        And I wanted to just ask the whole panel, each of you one
    by one: Do you think this bill will help restore integrity to
    the sport? If so, why? If not, then name one recommendation
    that would be--should be considered.
        And let's start with Mr. Irby.
        Mr. Irby. Yes, I do think it would greatly improve the
    integrity of the sport, save equine lives. And if I could add
    one thing, it would be requirements about the reporting of the
    medical history of the horses.
        Mr. Soto. OK. Thank you.
        Mr. Martin.
        Mr. Martin. I don't think the bill as it is presently
    written is going to improve the integrity of the sport. What I
    think would improve the integrity of the sport was to take that
    nongovernmental organization, turn it into a
    multijurisdictional investigative situation to do out-of-
    competition testing as well as out-of-competition suitability
    exams, to do the reviews of horses that are red-flagged because
    of their vet records and procedures, that maybe we need to know
    more about them.
        Mr. Soto. Thank you.
        Mr. Lear.
        Mr. Lear. I think this will do a world to improve the
    integrity of the sport and the interest of people, and that the
    two things that most drive people away from our sport are
    concerns about whether it is really fair and breakdowns.
    Nothing runs fans away from horseracing like the death of a
    horse.
        Having been involved with the development of this bill with
    the two cosponsors, and primary cosponsor from the start, it
    would be hard for me to say there is anything I particularly
    have left out at this point, but we have worked--I will say
    this: We have worked with a lot of other people, including
    AAEP, the vets, and some others that are in opposition to the
    bill, trying to find common ground so that we can all pull in
    the same direction.
        Mr. Soto. Thank you, Mr. Lear.
        Dr. Anderson.
        Dr. Anderson. I believe that it would improve the integrity
    from an anti-doping perspective. I do not think it would change
    very much on the therapeutic medication. And I think, if I was
    to add to this, it would be significant reforms in the area of
    safety, and I think it is totally lacking in safety oversight.
        Mr. Soto. Thank you, Dr. Anderson.
        Mr. De Francis.
        Mr. De Francis. An unquestionable yes to your question,
    Congressman. It would undoubtedly improve the integrity of the
    sport, most importantly in the perception of our customers and
    in the perception of the general public, whose support we need
    in order to have a viable business.
        Mr. Soto. Thanks.
        And, Mr. McCarron, thanks for appearing today, by the way,
    and for your opinion----
        Mr. McCarron. Thank you. You are very welcome.
        Yes, I certainly do feel it would definitely improve the
    integrity.
        Back in 2003, I was hired as general manager at Santa Anita
    Park. I did that. I was in that position for about a year and a
    half. The number one complaint I had from patrons, I had them
    coming into my office on a daily basis saying that the
    integrity of the sport is just abysmal, that they are sick and
    tired of betting on races, not knowing who the cheaters are,
    not knowing which horses are going to be coming out of barns
    that are not playing by the rules, and something drastic has to
    be done. And I believe--I have a lot of faith in this bill,
    that it would accomplish just that.
        Mr. Soto. Thank you.
        And, Mr. Drazin.
        Mr. Drazin. Thank you. This bill will not save racehorses.
    There will still be injuries. There will still be deaths. What
    it will do, I agree, is it will accomplish something in
    changing the public's perception of being able to promote that
    all horses are medication-free on race day. And I think that
    may restore some public confidence.
        But I think, in order to save horses, what I would like to
    see changed is that we incorporate amendments that deal with
    racetrack safety accreditation of your horses, preexisting
    injuries, and detection of horses that have problems on race
    day. In Monmouth Park, New Jersey, a State vet examines every
    horse every day that they are going to race. We need uniformity
    throughout the country, you know, in order to protect these
    horses.
        Mr. Soto. Thank you. And my time has expired.
        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
        Mr. Veasey, welcome, and you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Veasey. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        I wanted to talk with you about some of the safety concerns
    about--with the jockeys and the horses. Is there any sort of
    correlation with certain tracks and lower purses as it relates
    to these safety concerns? Are we seeing more incidents of some
    of the things that you all have been talking about today at
    tracks that don't have those higher purses versus tracks that
    may be more well organized that bring in more people where we
    see the purse is higher? Anybody?
        Mr. Drazin. I think that is correct.
        Mr. De Francis. Yes. The short answer to your question is
    yes.
        Mr. Veasey. Yes, it is.
        Mr. Drazin. And I think there are tracks who don't go
    through the NTRA track safety accreditation. You know, if
    everybody did it, we would have a safer product. There are
    tracks that need to examine the horses, State vets looking at
    these horses before they get out there, and sharing medical
    records. If you claim a horse and that horse has been treated--
    you can have a horse that you claim that had a fracture, and
    had a plate and screws put in there; next guy doesn't know
    until he gets the horse. So we need to share these records from
    day one all the way through racing.
        Mr. McCarron. And if I may, sir, there certainly is a
    correlation between lower purses and less opportunity for
    jockeys and for trainers. For instance, Sam Houston Race Park,
    the purses there are nowhere near what they are in New York or
    Florida or California, and the horses are of a much lower
    class. And I don't have any cold, hard facts in front of me to
    prove it, but I do believe that there is a correlation between
    lower purses, smaller tracks, and probably a higher rate of
    breakdown, which very often ends up in injury to the jockey.
        Mr. Veasey. All right. Well, yes, that is very concerning.
    I have a track in my district, in Grand Prairie, that since
    before I was in Congress, they have complained about, you know,
    the low purses at that track and how they have been, you know,
    bleeding clients for, you know, quite a long time. And, of
    course, you know, the jockeys and the horse people, they don't
    want to bring their--the better horses there to those tracks,
    and if that is causing a safety concern too as it relates to
    the jockeys and the horses, I think that is really bad.
        Do you think that States that don't have gaming--because a
    lot of lower purses have been tied to no gaming at these
    tracks? The people that I have talked to in the past have said
    that they would have higher purses if they had gaming also in
    conjunction with horseracing. Do you think that that makes a
    difference? Have you all seen the tracks that do actually have
    gaming? Are there better safety records at those tracks?
        Mr. De Francis. Again, the short answer to your question--
    --
        Mr. Veasey. Yes.
        Mr. De Francis [continuing]. Congressman, is yes.
    Ironically, I was actually part of the group back in the mid-
    1990s that was awarded a license to construct the racetrack
    that you now refer to in your home district in Grand Prairie,
    so I am very familiar with your district.
        Mr. Veasey. OK.
        Mr. De Francis. Unfortunately, safety costs money. That is
    the hard reality. And the more money that is available, then
    the higher safety standards and better testing protocols and
    more effective enforcement you can have. It is really not too
    much more complicated than that.
        Mr. Veasey. Right. Yes.
        Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I yield back.
        Ms. Schakowsky. Yes.
        And now I recognize Mr. Tonko, who has waived onto the
    committee and is a chief sponsor of this legislation.
        Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Mr. Martin, in your testimony, you state that ARCI is in
    favor of uniformity but prefer a voluntary approach.
        And, similarly, Mr. Drazin, you support uniformity and a
    commissioner-like approach to the sport, and yet oppose the
    only piece of legislation that would make that happen.
        And then, Dr. Anderson, you strongly support uniformity in
    your testimony as well.
        So we are all, in theory, talking about the same goals, and
    yet each of you opposees just the very piece of legislation
    that would make this a reality instead of a tired talking
    point. So my question to any of you, and it is mostly a
    rhetorical one, is: When can we actually expect results from
    this scheme? We have received countless promises from the
    industry for decades, and yet here we are in 2020 with more
    than 40 deaths on the tracks in Santa Anita, further tarnishing
    the sport in the eyes of the American public.
        When is enough enough? We have always had an open door, and
    I continue to be patient and open to working with you, as I
    believe my colleague, Representative Barr, has been, to
    incorporate feedback into the legislation, but the time for
    talk is done.
        We have a plan before us that is an action plan that
    respects the equine athlete from a medications perspective.
    Other ripple effects will come from this to the good, and I say
    let's not stop at doing the good here. We need action, not more
    promises, which is why I am proud that this legislation is
    moving forward.
        Dr. De Francis, I wanted to come back to address the Lasix
    question directly. I think your testimony provides the best
    perspective when it comes to how regulators should be
    evaluating the drug by using a cost-benefit analysis. Can you
    explain to the committee why the cost of continuing to allow
    race-day administration of Lasix vastly outweighs the benefits?
        Mr. De Francis. I think the simple answer is, again, trying
    to conduct this balance. The benefit is that we are allowing a
    small percentage--and the numbers vary, but it is in the
    neighborhood of six percent--of the horses that have a genetic
    predisposition to EIPH to be able to be therapeutically treated
    by Lasix, and, thus, race where they otherwise would not be
    able to. That is the benefit.
        The cost is that the 94 percent of the horses that are not
    genetically prone to suffering from EIPH are using it purely as
    a performance enhancer to eliminate water weight and allow them
    to run faster because they are carrying less weight. Anyone
    that has ever engaged in any kind of athletic endeavor knows
    that, if you are dehydrated and you are running as fast as you
    can, it is going to have a whole host of negative health
    impacts on your body.
        And that is the reason why every other jurisdiction in the
    world, outside of the United States and Canada--the U.K.,
    continental Europe, South Africa, the Middle East, Japan, Hong
    Kong, take your pick--all prohibit the use of race-day Lasix,
    because in conducting that cost-benefit analysis, they have
    concluded that the scales tip very heavily in favor of not
    allowing it.
        Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Mr. De Francis.
        I have done a lot of work on the opioid crisis, and let me
    make an analogy to another drug as it relates to humans, that
    being the opioids. We all know that opioids are highly
    effective in addressing pain, but the cost-benefit analysis
    requires their judicious use because the cost to the individual
    and society is so high when opioids are inappropriately
    prescribed to people who simply don't need them.
        Mr. De Francis, it seems that every other major racing
    jurisdiction in the world has done this same cost-benefit
    analysis with regard to race-day Lasix and decided to ban the
    drug on race day. How have these racing jurisdictions managed
    to thrive despite the use of race-day Lasix?
        Mr. De Francis. I think probably the biggest single
    distinction between their thriving without it and the way we
    race in America is we have a much higher percentage of races
    that are run on dirt in America than there are overseas,
    particularly in Europe and other parts of the world, and we
    race more often. There is a lot more--there is just more racing
    in the United States than there is in foreign countries. And so
    that is the one reason why they have been able to succeed
    without using race-day medication.
        I think the far more important issue, however, is--and you
    referenced it earlier, Congressman. The problem generally of
    drugs and medications and their impact on horses' health and
    well-being has been brewing for years, almost like a growing
    tsunami. Now, the tsunami is about to crest and destroy us all.
    We have been fiddling while Rome has been smoldering. Now, Rome
    is engulfed in flames in an absolute inferno.
        As I mentioned in my direct testimony, we are losing, at an
    increasing rate, the confidence of our basic customers. No
    business can survive long when that happens. You know, I have
    run a business for 20 years and had to make payroll. I know
    what--you know, what you need to do. And when your customers--
    Chris mentioned his time as general manager of Santa Anita.
    This crisis has now reached--well, this problem has now reached
    crisis proportions. And we can't let--I agree with many of the
    things that Mr. Martin and Mr. Drazin have said in terms of
    things that we can do to improve the horse health and safety,
    but let's not make the perfect the enemy of the good. We need
    to take action right away. Every day that we delay, we are
    losing more and more public support, more and more fans, more
    and more customers, and it is going to be that much more
    difficult to get them back.
        Mr. Tonko. Well, let me thank all of the perspectives in
    this sport, in this industry, for your participation on the
    legislation. And I appreciate my colleague and friend,
    Representative Barr, for all the work that we have been able to
    do together with that input. So let's move forward with
    progress.
        And, with that, Madam Chair, I yield back. And, again,
    thank you for the opportunity for the hearing.
        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
        Well, we have the chairman of the full committee who is
    here, Mr. Pallone, who is now recognized for questions for 5
    minutes.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        I said in my opening remarks that we can all agree that the
    safety of the sport and the health of the animals is most
    important, and to make the sport safer, we need to identify the
    factors contributing to horses breaking down. So my questions
    are of my friend, Mr. Drazin. Dennis, thanks for being here
    again.
        In your written testimony, you state that there are areas
    of concern not addressed in this legislation that could improve
    the health and welfare of racehorses. I know you said a little
    bit about it, but what are those--if you want to elaborate a
    little more on those areas of concern and to what extent they
    are contributing to racehorse injuries and fatalities
    specifically?
        Mr. Drazin. Sure. So it starts--I guess a good reference
    for me as I was chairman of the New Jersey Racing Commission.
    Racing was about to close down in New Jersey. Governor Christie
    at the time said either someone is going to take over the
    track, State is not going to run it, and I stepped off the
    Commission to do that.
        So the first thing that I did when I came into Monmouth
    Park was I addressed track safety. I spent the money that was
    necessary to make sure that we had a professional crew that
    came in there, added dirt, added base, did whatever was
    necessary to ensure that these horses would race over a safe
    surface, and that worked. Monmouth has had a lower breakdown
    rate than Santa Anita, a lower breakdown rate than the national
    average.
        But, frankly, I am not here to tell you it is OK with me if
    one horse breaks down. It is not. So you start with making your
    tracks safe. Then you have to make sure that medical records of
    these horses are shared, because a lot of these horses have
    preexisting conditions that the vets know about, the owners
    know about, but the next person down the line doesn't know
    about them. And when those horses are already compromised, you
    know, it creates a safety problem.
        In my own life, you know, when my horses have a problem, I
    give them time. I get them healthy again. No horse runs better
    than a healthy horse that is sound. So that is the way I handle
    it. But the industry, you know, has people that have money,
    people that are struggling, so not everybody can do that.
        Then you need to make sure that you address certifications
    of racetrack safety. So the NTRA, which is our national
    Thoroughbred Horsemen's Organization, has a committee that
    certifies racetracks for safety. Every track should be
    certified for safety. And I think when we talk about
    medications, we do things, you know, to react to issues that
    are going on, so we have third-party administration of Lasix.
        The Chairman. Well, let me ask you about the medication,
    because we are going to run out of time, so I have kind of two
    questions----
        Mr. Drazin. Sure.
        The Chairman [continuing]. So if I could put them into one.
        You suggested that modifications to the current medication
    protocols and regulatory structure may not actually protect the
    health and welfare of the racehorses; it could actually harm
    them. So I wanted you to explain that.
        But then, also, you stated that a uniform anti-doping and
    medication control program and standardized medication
    protocols are needed, and so I wanted to say how we can best go
    about creating such a program and protocol.
        If you would try to answer both of those, because
    otherwise, we are going to run out of time.
        Mr. Drazin. Yes. I think Federal legislation is the wrong
    way to go, but in response to what Congressman Tonko said
    before, we all want to accomplish the same thing, so we have
    been working very hard with the NTRA. There are about 30 of us
    that sit around the room, and we are compromising. We are going
    to come up with a more comprehensive bill that addresses all of
    these issues. I am frustrated too with it----
        The Chairman. But specifically with regard to the ban on
    medication like Lasix, you used----
        Mr. Drazin. Yes, sir. So Lasix is something that is
    therapeutic for horses. The AAEP says it is the only
    therapeutic treatment of horses that will help these horses.
    And I was around in days when New York did not permit Lasix.
    Lasix has slowly gained acceptance if you go back a number of
    decades. And in New York, when you couldn't use Lasix and other
    jurisdictions used them, we had problems in New York, so they
    withdrew them from water a day before. They would muzzle them,
    so they wouldn't feed these horses, trying to accomplish the
    same weight loss.
        They would cheat. They would give these horses medications,
    not race day, but the day before, things like Kentucky Red,
    things that they were experimenting with to see if they could
    hold the bleeding. And they are going to continue to do that.
        If you ban Lasix, number one, my track, Monmouth Park, we
    probably won't survive. I don't think we will be able to get
    enough horses to participate, because probably 80 to 90 percent
    of our horses run on Lasix now.
        We are not a jurisdiction that has a casino. I think New
    York gets $250 million a year for their racing industry.
    Pennsylvania gets a similar number. New Jersey doesn't get that
    kind of money. So we rely upon the horses that come to us, and
    they compete. And if you have a 5-horse field, because horses
    can't compete anymore because they can't compete unless they
    get Lasix, instead of a 10- or 12-horse field, you are going to
    lose revenues.
        You are not going to be able to make ends meet, and then
    you are going to start rolling back on your other commitments
    that you have to your horses to make it safe there. You are not
    going to have money for dirt. You are not going to have money
    to work on the base.
        I want to do what is right for horseracing, and I would
    pledge to all of you to continue to work with the NTRA and this
    special committee that we have to develop a more comprehensive
    plan.
        I am frustrated by the delay. I agree with Congressman
    Tonko, it has taken too long. But we are at a crisis now.
    Because of what happened at Santa Anita, the whole focus of the
    industry is on saving horseracing, because we recognize we are
    heading in the wrong direction. And I think that if you give
    us--I am going to go out on a limb and, say, another six
    months--we will be able to come together with a consensus bill
    that would be better for the industry.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Ms. Schakowsky. All right. Well, so that concludes our
    first panel. I want to thank all the witnesses who are here
    today. I think this was really an excellent conversation that
    we have had, and hopefully, we will be able to move forward
    together.
        And, at this time, I ask that staff prepare the witness
    table so that we may begin our second panel shortly.
        And, once again, we are all appreciative of your thoughtful
    contributions to this conversation. Thank you.
        Mr. Lear. Thank you.
        Mr. De Francis. Thank you.
        [Recess.] [12:31 p.m.]
        Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
        I will now introduce the witness, the one witness, for our
    second panel, Congressman Andy Barr, who represents Kentucky's
    Sixth District--Sixth Congressional District.
        You are recognized for an opening statement for 5 minutes.
    As is our tradition, we will not be asking questions of a
    Member, but you are now recognized.

     STATEMENT OF THE HON. ANDY BARR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                FROM THE COMMONWEALTH STATE OF KENTUCKY

        Mr. Barr. Thank you, Chairwoman Schakowsky. Thank you for
    your leadership and for holding this hearing. Thank you,
    Ranking Member Cathy McMorris Rodgers, for your leadership and
    for holding this important hearing. And I want to thank my
    cosponsor and the author of this legislation, Paul Tonko, for
    his leadership in striving towards reform of the horse industry
    in a way that will advance the safety, the integrity, and the
    international competitiveness of the sport.
        And as was indicated by the ranking member, I do have the
    privilege of representing the--what is known as the horse
    capital of the world. My friend, Mr. Tonko, sometimes quibbles
    with that, because New York is such a great racing State, but
    this is a beautiful sport. It has a rich heritage and history,
    and it has, in addition to being part of the fabric of our
    culture in New York and Florida and Maryland and California and
    Kentucky and other great States, it is a massive economic
    impact to our country and obviously to our States.
        And we need to preserve the safety of the equine athletes,
    the human athletes involved, and the integrity of the sport,
    and the international competitiveness, both of our racing stock
    and our breeding stock, in order to continue to earn the
    public's confidence so that we can continue to have the jobs
    and economic activity that this rich sport and industry
    provides to so many of our constituents.
        Let me just take the opportunity to--I think the problem
    has been well laid out, the 38 different conflicting
    jurisdictions. Let me take the balance of my time to address
    some of the issues.
        I think that some of the recommendations by some of our
    witnesses who oppose the legislation make sense. I think we
    should listen to those recommendations, including Mr. Martin's
    view that we need to bring more of these horses under
    government supervision. That is what our bill would do.
        Mr. Drazin's point is that we do have a public perception
    problem. He doesn't think that that this will prevent
    breakdowns because he is focused on track maintenance. Track
    maintenance is an issue, but it is not the only issue, and
    uneven medication rules are a part of it, and covering up and
    masking the pain of the horse is a true issue. This will reduce
    breakdowns.
        I think sharing medical records, uniformity of track
    conditions, and maintenance standards makes sense.
    Certification of racetrack safety makes sense. The NTRA's
    special committees make a lot of sense and they are doing good
    work. But this idea that Federal legislation is the wrong way
    to go, if you go back to The Jockey Club minutes, from the
    1970s and the 1980s when they were discussing medication
    reform, they were saying back then that we don't need Federal
    legislation. The efforts to reform the industry by the industry
    itself, and the efforts through interstate compacts have
    failed. Mr. Lear pointed that out.
        With respect to FTC oversight, I want to point out to the
    members considering this legislation that the architecture of
    this bill fully makes sure that we have industry
    representation, and expertise that would go into the
    formulation and enforcement of the rules, especially and
    including veterinarians to inform the process. I would point
    out that the opponents of the legislation, Mr. Martin, Dr.
    Anderson, and Mr. Drazin, all indicated that they support
    uniformity, uniformity that has not been achieved in 40 to 50
    years of trying without Congress.
        I want to also point out something that has not been
    mentioned, and that is that handle drives the sport. We have
    seen a decline in handle, meaning that horseplayers and
    participants, wagerers are losing interest in this sport. That
    is the lifeblood of this industry. It means bigger purses. We
    need to attract a new generation of fans that do have
    competition, in terms of the entertainment dollar out there.
    The decline in handle is an indication that we need reform, and
    if we can attract a new generation of fans, that will drive
    purses, and that will be the solution for Monmouth Park, not
    just putting our head in the sand on this.
        International competitiveness. If you talk to participants
    in this sport in France and in the United Kingdom and in Dubai
    and in Japan and Australia, where they have no race-day
    medication, there is a reputation problem with our product. And
    coming from the breeding capital of the world where we sell
    yearlings, this reputational problem is a big deal. And
    international competitiveness can be repaired and the sales can
    be repaired internationally if we have additional integrity.
        Finally, on the issue of Lasix, which admittedly is a
    controversial topic, you know, Dr. Anderson indicated that
    there was only one therapeutic indication for Lasix or Salix,
    and that is EIPH. If you go to any major track in America
    today, if you were just a casual fan, and you open up the daily
    racing form, it is pretty apparent that 90 percent or more of
    those entrants are on Lasix. I can tell you that 90 percent of
    those horses are not suffering from EIPH. So if the only
    therapeutic indication is EIPH, why are all the other
    competitors on Lasix? Four-hour administration is not
    necessarily required, but there is a scientific debate about
    that.
        But the fact of the matter is, we heard the testimony from
    the rider expert here, that obviously, a lower-weight horse has
    a performance-enhancement advantage. And so why do trainers
    authorize third-party administration of Lasix to horses that
    don't have the problem? It is because it is performance-
    enhancing.
        Thank you for the opportunity to participate, and I yield
    back.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Barr follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Hon. Andy Barr

        Thank you, Chairwoman Schakowsky for holding this hearing
    on the Horseracing Integrity Act, legislation I have introduced
    with my colleague, Rep. Paul Tonko, to enhance uniformity,
    safety, and integrity in horseracing.
        Nothing is more synonymous with the Commonwealth of
    Kentucky than thoroughbred breeding and horseracing. My
    District in particular, holds the title Horse Capital of the
    World. My home, Lexington, Kentucky, is surrounded by more than
    400 horse farms and Keeneland hosts many notable races,
    including the Toyota Bluegrass Stakes and the Breeders Cup-
    which will be held again at the racetrack this fall. With the
    privilege of representing this unique industry comes the
    responsibility of fighting for its future.
        I want to emphasize today, however, that this sport is not
    solely relevant to those in states that are home to Triple
    Crown Races. Horseracing is very much a national sport. The
    horse industry contributes approximately $50 billion in direct
    economic impact to the U.S. economy and has a direct employment
    impact of 988,394 jobs. Therefore, advocating for this industry
    requires more than celebrating its proud heritage.
        Currently regulated by 38 separate jurisdictions, the
    horseracing industry labors under a patchwork of conflicting
    and inconsistent, state-based rules governing prohibited
    substances, lab accreditation, testing, and penalties for
    violations. This lack of uniformity has impeded interstate
    commerce, compromised the international competitiveness of the
    industry, and undermined public confidence in the integrity of
    the sport.
        The Horseracing Integrity Act would remedy these problems
    by authorizing the creation of a nongovernmental anti-doping
    authority governed by representatives of all major
    constituencies of the industry and responsible for implementing
    a national, uniform medication program for the entire
    horseracing industry.
        I am a conservative who believes in federalism and states'
    rights, but I also understand that the Constitution gives
    Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce precisely
    for the purpose of eliminating these kinds of impediments to
    interstate exchange. A national uniform medication program is
    not about creating more bureaucracy or regulation; rather it is
    about streamlining the current regulatory structure to ensure
    the safety of our athletes.
        The most recent draft of the Horseracing Integrity Act was
    developed through a highly deliberative and bipartisan process
    and takes into consideration a diversity of perspectives from
    all parts of the industry. The result is support from a
    majority of Members of the House. We must build on the momentum
    in Congress and the industry as a whole to ensure the safety of
    our athletes and increase the popularity, public confidence,
    and international competitiveness of the sport.

        Ms. Schakowsky. The gentleman yields back. Thank you very
    much.
        And now without--I request unanimous consent to enter the
    following testimony into the record.
        Mrs. Rodgers. Oh, yes.
        Ms. Schakowsky. Without objection, so ordered.
        A letter of support from Tom V. David, DVM. A letter from
    Samantha Smith, The Jockey Club. A letter from the New York
    Racing Association. A letter from Arthur Gray. A letter from--
    what is it? --Keeneland Association, Inc. A letter from the
    Humane Society Veterinary Medicine Association. A letter from
    the U.S. Harness Racing Alumni Association. A letter from 50
    horse trainers. A letter from the Homes for Horses Coalition. A
    statement by Representative Andy Barr. A letter from Arthur
    Hancock, Stone Farm president. A letter from the former
    chairman of the Association of Racing Commissioners
    International. A letter from the former president of the
    American Association of Equine Practitioners. A letter from
    Nancy L. McLean, University of Edinburgh Equine Association. A
    letter from R. Anthony Chamblin, supporting--sporting member--
    no--supporting member of the Water Hay Oats Alliance--Water Hay
    Oats Alliance. A letter from the governor and Mrs. Steven B.
    Besh--Beshear of Kentucky. A letter from Sid Gustaf--Gustafson,
    doctor of veterinary medicine. A letter from Barry Irwin, Team
    Valor International. A lot of interest in this.
        A letter from Staci Hancock of the Water Hay Oats Alliance,
    managing member. A letter from Matt F. Uliano, right, or
    Iuliano, executive vice president and executive director of The
    Jockey Club. A letter from Stewart Janney, chairman of The
    Jockey Club. A list of the current 38 pari-mutuel racing
    jurisdictions. A letter from the West Point--from the West
    Point Thoroughbreds. A letter from Travis T. Tygart, CEO of the
    U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. A letter from Vinnie Viola of St.
    Elias Stables, LLC. A letter from Dr. A. Gary Lavin. A letter
    from Dr. Douglas Daniels. A letter from Keith Crouper. A letter
    from the Equine Health and Welfare Alliance. A letter from the
    National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association. A
    letter from the Iowa Horsemen's Benevolent and Protection
    Association, David McShane. A letter from the Iowa Horsemen's
    Benevolent and Protection Association, John Moss. A letter from
    the Horsemen's of West Virginia. Letter and documents from Dr.
    Thomas Tobin. A letter from the North American Association of
    Racetrack Veterinarians. A letter from the Washington National
    Horsemen's Benevolent and Protection Association. A letter from
    the American Quarter Horse Association. A letter from the
    Kentucky Horsemen's Benevolent and Protection Association. And
    finally, a letter from the Animal Welfare Institute.
        Ms. Schakowsky. And now I would like to thank our witness
    and the previous witnesses for their participation in today's
    hearing.
        I remind Members that pursuant to committee rules, they
    have ten business days to submit additional questions for the
    record to be answered by the witnesses who have appeared. I ask
    each witness to respond as promptly as possible to any question
    that you may receive.
        And at this time, the subcommittee is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12:43 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
        [The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]

                     Prepared Statement of Hon. Greg Walden

        Good Morning and welcome to the Consumer Protection and
    Commerce Subcommittee legislative hearing on H.R. 1754, the
    Horseracing Integrity Act of 2019.
        I want to first extend a warm welcome to our distinguished
    panel for joining us today. Protecting the health of horses is
    important to all of us in this room and evokes strong passions.
    We all want to do what is best; we just disagree on what that
    is.
        From the Pacific Northwest to the renowned racetracks in
    Kentucky, New York, and New Jersey, horses hold a special place
    in our lives, our culture, and our local economies. In my
    district alone, roughly 50,000 people travel to Pendleton,
    Oregon to participate in the world-famous Pendleton Round-Up
    rodeo. Prineville, Oregon is home to local horse races at the
    Crooked River Round-Up. Many communities across rural Oregon
    hold rodeos and races throughout the year. So, I am no stranger
    to the important role horses and horseracing play in our lives.
        Last Congress, we held a similar legislative hearing on
    then-H.R, 2651, the Horse Racing Integrity Act of 2017, and
    discussed many of the same issues we will explore today. This
    hearing is also very timely. Within the past 13 months, a
    number of horses have tragically died at the Santa Anita
    racetrack in Los Angeles, California. Now, I understand those
    deaths are not likely tied to Lasix or necessarily captured by
    this legislation, but the welfare of horses certainly is top of
    mind.
        Today, we will hear from a diverse panel that covers all
    facets of the industry and I hope we will hear from you how
    your industry is currently regulated, what can be done to
    better protect horses, how this legislation will impact your
    industry, and if there have been any industry-led efforts to
    try to resolve some of the issues we discussed last Congress.
        You all are experts in your field, and your insights are
    very valuable to us. Thank you for being here today and I am
    looking forward to your perspectives on this.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]