[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]