FROM: RANDY MOSS TO: COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE DATE: JUNE…

FROM: RANDY MOSS

TO:     COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

DATE: JUNE 19, 2008

RE:     WRITTEN TESTIMONY



  Thank you, Vice-Chairwoman Schakowsky, Ranking Member

Whitfield, and Members of the Subcommittee.

  My name is Randy Moss. I work as a horse racing analyst and

reporter for ESPN and ABC Sports.

  I'm not the football player. I also have never trained racehorses,

have never ridden racehorses, and I have had no veterinary training.

I have been asked to join today's discussion because I have been close

to thoroughbred racing for 30 years, as a newspaper reporter,

handicapper and freelance writer; through brief stints as a racetrack

manager, jockey agent and publicist; and for the last decade in

television.

  Because of these positions, I have had extensive conversations with

trainers, jockeys, owners, breeders, racing executives, racing

administrators and veterinarians about a variety of issues, some of

which are being discussed here. Just as importantly, I have a regular
dialogue with horseplayers, the bettors who are the lifeblood of horse

racing but whose opinions are too often overlooked.

  As a result of all this, I have developed plenty of my own opinions

along the way that ­ for better or worse - I seldom hesitate to express.

  For starters, one opinion is that thoroughbred racing occupies a

unique position in sports - combining tradition, excitement,

pageantry, the majesty of one of the world's most beautiful creatures,

and, of course, gambling.

   But in one respect, thoroughbred racing is no different than the

NFL, NBA or major league baseball: each sport has problems and

challenges that must be confronted head-on for that sport to thrive.

   And thoroughbred racing has its share of issues. Some can be

easily corrected and others can't. But this is no time for a head-in-

sand approach.

   The way I see it, the single biggest dilemma facing this sport is the

haphazard and dysfunctional manner in which racing is scheduled

and administrated.

   Unlike other sports, racing has no "league office" with power to

make decisions for the long-term best interests of the sport. Instead,

racing rules and racing dates are set by politically-appointed racing
commissioners in each state, whose decisions are typically motivated

by what they perceive to be best for that particular state and often are

at odds with the best interests of the sport as a whole.

   Imagine if the NFL were set up to permit each state to field as

many pro teams as it wanted, play as many games as it wanted all

year long, and set its own individual football rules with no

enforceable league guidelines. In modern-day America, horse racing

has always been set up in this fashion.

   During the glory days of racing, when horse racing was practically

the only outlet for legal gambling, it didn't matter. In that scenario,

racing was almost impossible to screw up.

   But now, racing faces intense competition for the gambling and

entertainment dollar. At a time when the sport desperately needs a

single-minded and consistent strategy in the marketplace, it has 38

racing states with 38 sets of rules and 38 different priorities. And

that is a recipe for disaster.

   Thoroughbred racing is cannibalizing itself. This Saturday alone

racing will be conducted at Belmont Park on Long Island; at Charles

Town and Mountaineer Park, both in West Virginia; at Delaware

Park; at Colonial Downs in nearby Virginia; at Laurel Park just across
the border in Maryland; at Finger Lakes in upstate New York; at

Monmouth Park in New Jersey; at Penn National, Philadelphia Park

and Presque Isle Downs, all in Pennsylvania; and at Suffolk Downs in

Massachussetts. And these are only the racetracks in the Northeast

region of the country.

  Incredibly, each track has determined that this type of scheduling

is best for itself and its horsemen, even though these tracks are

essentially competing for the same horses. There aren't enough good

horses to go around, and thus the quality of racing at each track is

cheapened, average field sizes in the best races are reduced, and

consequently frustrated horseplayers bet less money.

   At tracks such as Saratoga Race Course, Keeneland Race Course

and Del Mar, the sport thrives on short boutique racing seasons that

create a festival atmosphere and yearly anticipation. Unfortunately,

too many other tracks are content to grind out a profit through

quantity instead of quality, with endless cards of cheap races run for a

dwindling fan base. Horsemen are complicit in this, as well, since

they typically resist efforts to reduce racing dates, as do state racing

commissioners, who are often reluctant to endorse less tax revenue

today in exchange for a more positive long-range outlook.
   Another effect of these extended racing seasons is the pressure it

puts on horses, especially in areas of intense track-to-track

competition such as the Northeast. In a struggle to fill races,

racetracks are forced to pressure trainers to run horses more

frequently than they might otherwise feel comfortable doing.

   Thoroughbred racing in America is proof that there can indeed be

too much of a good thing.

   Racing's lack of a powerful central authority is also a primary

reason for medication controversies currently engulfing the sport. In

the 1970s, American horsemen began convincing state authorities

that legalization of raceday medications would help them run horses

more frequently in support of racetracks that were scheduling ever-

longer racing seasons. Because longer racing seasons pitted tracks

against each other in intense competition for horses, every state

eventually conceded to the easing of medication restrictions so as not

to be at a competitive disadvantage with other states. Thus America

became the only racing country in the world to permit raceday use of

drugs such as analgesic Butazolidin and diuretic Lasix, which lowers

blood pressure and is believed by many to reduce the occurance and
severity of the EIPH (exercise-inducted pulmonary hemorrhaging)

that hampers the breathing of some racehorses.

   Included among accepted raceday medications were anabolic

steroids such as Winstrol, which is still legal in 28 racing states.

Steroids would eventually gain widespread use as an appetite

stimulant and to help horses recover more quickly from the effects of

exercise and put on muscle mass.

   But well before the highly-publicized breakdowns of Barbaro and

Eight Belles, many within the sport were becoming convinced that lax

medication rules were having a negative rather than positive effect on

American racing.

   Despite the initial arguments that medication would enable horses

to race more often, the opposite happened. From 1975 to 2007,

average starts per horse per year dropped a staggering 62% - from

10.23 to an all-time low of 6.31 last year.

    The vast majority of trainers now complain that their horses have

become much more fragile. Potential explanations of this perceived

increased fragility are numerous and complicated, including the

possibilities that medication has weakened the gene pool and that
commercial breeding practices driven by the marketplace have shifted

too much toward brilliance rather than durability.

   At the same time, raceday use of Lasix has been allowed to spiral

out of control ­ even though the drug is banned by the World Anti-

Doping Agency because it is allegedly used to mask the presence of

more powerful illegal stimulants. Of the 92 horses entered to run

today at Belmont Park, 88 were designated to run on Lasix. This is

not what was originally intended.

    Now for the good news: the Racing Medication and Testing

Consortium (RMTC) was founded in 2002 and under the guidance of

Dr. Scot Waterman it has made great strides in medication reform

and recommended penalties for drug offenders. Owners and trainers

have become frustrated and confused at the different medication

guidelines for various states, and they have gradually begun to

embrace uniform rules suggestions developed by the RMTC, even

though these rules are rolling back raceday medication use

considerably. Now, according to Waterman, the primary difference

between medication rules in the U.S. and Europe is in the use of Lasix

and steroids. The RMTC is recommending strong restrictions on

steroids, and many states are listening.
    One of the holdups, as always, is funding. The RMTC needs

continued ­ and additional ­ funding to continue its good work. The

sport needs to find the revenue to consolidate its 18 testing

laboratories and enhance testing procedures for items such as EPO,

or Epogen, which is lesser-known by the public but is perceived to

enhance performance much more than steroids.

    Also, in the wake of the Eight Belles tragedy, the Thoroughbred

Safety Committee was formed to tackle the tough issues regarding

medication, breeding practices and track surfaces. The committee's

initial recommendations issued Tuesday regarding steroids, safety

whips and proper racing shoes have met with widespread praise, and

more recommendations are to come. However, the lack of a central

racing authority forces the Thoroughbred Safety Committee and other

industry leaders to announce that they "support," "strongly support,"

"endorse," "urge," "encourage" and otherwise beg and plead for the

various racing states to adopt the changes. The reason for this

language is obvious: the sport has no power to "require" that changes

be made. In the current industry framework, any state that wishes to

thumb its nose at such recommendations is free to do so, with no

official ramifications.
    After the one-two punches of Barbaro in 2006 and this year's

Kentucky Derby, mainstream media began a closer examination of

thoroughbred racing. The public was concerned about the

humaneness of the sport, and too often were appalled at what they

were seeing. Racing can and must do better. But remember that

these issues being debated existed long before the demise of Barbaro

and Eight Belles, but the sport lacked a system as well as a desire to

implement needed changes. The attention now being focused on

these issues, by this committee as well as the public, now gives horse

racing a rare opportunity to conquer its inefficiencies and pull

together in a positive direction.

   And along with the opportunity comes a sober responsibility: this

is something the sport can ill afford to mess up.



    Some conclusions:

    1) Most in the sport have no desire for federal regulation of horse

       racing. But through whatever means it can be accomplished,

       thoroughbred racing desperately needs a strong central

       authority with regulatory power to make binding decisions
  necessary for the short- and long-term best interests of the

  sport.

2) The explosion of racing dates must be reversed ­ and in some

  cases dramatically ­ perhaps through the formation of a league

  of world-class U.S. racetracks with coordinated racing dates,

  stakes schedules and simulcasting rates.

3) The use of Lasix as a raceday medication should be abolished.

  At the very least, no horse that has ever competed with Lasix

  or any other race-day medication should be allowed to

  propagate as a sire or broodmare in order to restore the

  integrity of the thoroughbred genetic pool. In addition, all

  graded stakes races ­ the designation given to the country's

  premier stakes ­ should be run with no raceday medication.

4) The Thoroughbred Safety Committee's recommendations on

  steroids, whips and proper racing shoes should be immediately

  instituted.

5) Nationwide funding mechanisms must be instituted to: ensure

  the RMTC's continued beneficial research and

  recommendations, including development of additional post-

  race tests for illegal drugs; consolidate the country's 18
  laboratories used for post-race testing into one or two

  "superlabs" with capabilities and resources to conduct testing

  for all prohibited substances; pay for enforcement of drug

  penalties, including legal costs associated with appeals.

6) The study of racetrack surfaces must continue to determine if

  synthetic surfaces actually reduce instances of catastrophic

  injury in thoroughbreds as compared to well-maintained dirt

  surfaces.

7) Rules should be instituted to hold veterinarians accountable in

  drug offenses as well as the trainers who employ them.

8) The U.S. should convene a summit with other major racing

  countries to develop regulations that could extend the careers

  of top racehorses, i.e., a rule requiring all sires or broodmares

  to be at least 5 years of age to conceive a registered

  thoroughbred racehorse.