HISA the Focus at HBPA, Racing Commissioners Conference

Edited Press Release

Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry and Daniel Suhr, managing attorney for the Liberty Justice Center, told an assembly of racehorse owners, trainers and racing regulators Tuesday that they expect the Horseracing Integrity & Safety Act (HISA) to wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court– and they also believe America's highest court will strike down the legislation as unconstitutional.

While the room at the Hotel Monteleone was populated with folks concerned how HISA will impact their industry, Landry and Suhr said the four legal challenges before the Fifth and Sixth Circuits have much broader implications for the country. HISA, originally passed by Congress when slipped into the 2020 Covid relief bill, sets up a private corporation, also known as HISA or the Authority, with broad powers to create, implement and enforce safety rules and drug and medication policies with the Federal Trade Commission providing some measure of oversight.

Landry, who brought suit against HISA in U.S. District Court in the Western District of Louisiana, was the keynote speaker Tuesday on the first of three days of panel discussions and presentations at the National Horsemen's Benevolent & Protective Association (NHBPA) conference being held in conjunction with the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ARCI), which represent pari-mutuel racing regulators.

“If we don't get this thing struck down, you better have this meeting in probably the dining room–and I mean the small dining room here at the Monteleone,” Landry said. “It will be a bunch of folks who have more money in their pockets than they know what to do with. And they're going to control the tracks and horse racing, and the rest of us really won't be able to enjoy the sport. This law is actually designed to eliminate the very fabric of horse racing. And so we stood up.

“I said, 'We are going to keep filing suits, and we're going to find a way to bring this thing to the U.S. Supreme Court if we have to. Guess what? We are there. And I'm glad we're there. I know the Sixth Circuit decision (upholding HISA, in contrast to the Fifth Circuit's appellate court ruling) was not all that great for us. But quite frankly, I think it was. Because it is going to absolutely force this case before the United States Supreme Court.”

Suhr added, “I believe this case is important not just for this industry. I know it is. But I'm here because I believe it's important for our country and our democracy, and I don't say that lightly. Because fundamentally what we're fighting about is accountability, transparency and fairness, which are core guarantees of our Constitution to all of us as citizens. When the government exercises power in our lives, when it comes into our business, our families, it is accountable to voters, it is transparent to the stakeholder community, to the news media and to all of us as citizens. And it is neutral. It is independent and it is fair when it exercises that power.”

Suhr said, based on their written SCOTUS opinions, that he believes there are enough justices to strike down HISA. “There's no such thing as a slam dunk in my business,” he said. “It's a lot like yours. Everything is a little bit of a gamble. But I do this for a living and I can tell you, we brought this case because we believe when it gets to the Supreme Court, those fundamental principles we've been talking about are actually going to decide the day. I think we have a really great shot at this.”

A Tuesday afternoon panel offered concepts that could lead to uniformity without vesting so much control and power in one entity and still utilizing the existing racing commissions.

“As we all look through a different lens now, something has to be established for uniformity,” said National HBPA CEO Eric Hamelback. “We want to make it constitutional and we want to make sure the right participants are helping to make the decisions. I see it as the right participants are in this room. We want uniformity based on science. We want it based on peer-reviewed research. We feel the way the (HISA) legislation was drafted, it doesn't lean toward being based on science. I think there's a lot of opinion in there.”

The post HISA the Focus at HBPA, Racing Commissioners Conference appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Letters To The Editor: James Gagliano

In Association of Racing Commissioners International (ARCI) President Ed Martin's letter to the Thoroughbred Daily News on Feb. 2, he once again defends the status quo with few facts and no real solutions to racing's lack of national uniformity in rules and regulations for safety and medication control.

Ed has been defending the status quo for years. In 2018, and again in 2020, Ed testified before Congress against the then-forerunner to the Horse Racing Integrity and Safety Act, saying it was “a radical and unnecessary federalization of a state responsibility that is exercised effectively.”

Exercised effectively?

Clearly, he chooses to ignore the March 2020 federal arrests, and ultimate convictions, of the 27 trainers and veterinarians who, incidentally, operated worry free for years under Ed's racing commissioners. He chooses to ignore that our industry is no longer operating in a vacuum, that our equine athletes have advocates outside the racetrack and they have influence with state and federal legislators. Finally, Ed chooses to ignore that HISA has been working hard, and for the most part cooperatively, with states and racetracks to implement HISA rules.

Ed needs to be reminded, again, how we got here.

Over decades, regulators have repeatedly “promised” to clean up horse racing. There have been countless calls for rule uniformity since I can remember. Virtually every industry conference has touted the future as having standardized nationwide rules with more vigorous enforcement. The concept is nothing new, but because of HISA, this is the first time the goal is truly within our grasp.

The Racing Medication and Testing Consortium did a lot of good for the industry, but the nationwide reform we thought would come from it never materialized. I had hopes for the National Uniform Medication Program (NUMP), but once again, the regulatory authorities of different jurisdictions were unable to enact the same rules and regulations across the nation. In 2020, The Jockey Club developed a scorecard for the NUMP to see if it was effective. It wasn't. Only nine states had fully adopted all four phases of the program; 16 states had adopted only one. Mid-Atlantic states joined forces over the years to come into compliance with NUMP, but most other regions did not.

Ed has long suggested that a federal racing compact among the state regulators is all that we need. He conveniently omits that there already is a compact, and it has attracted virtually no support from the membership of the ARCI. With the ability of individual states to opt out of rules they do not favor, the compact all but guaranteed the same morass of inconsistent and conflicting rules among the states so many key industry participants have long wanted to correct.

Ed wrote, “It's hard for some of us who have been around for a while to watch as this situation could have been avoided.” In a way, he's right about that point. HISA would never have had an adverse legal decision if the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act had never become law. But, for those of us who want change, Ed's worn-out proposals to “get everyone in a room and come up with an alternative approach to avoid the endless and costly litigation” reflects an inability to either understand or appreciate that there is a divide in this industry between those who savor the illusionary comfort of the status quo and those who know that if racing is going to truly survive it must make safety of our athletes and integrity of our game our preeminent goals.

Perhaps Ed has been fighting against HISA since the beginning because he's afraid people will realize that the ARCI failed its mission. According to ARCI's website, it sets “…international standards for racing regulation, medication policy, drug testing laboratories, totalizator systems, racetrack operation and security, as well as off-track wagering entities.” So, HISA is making medication regulation standards uniform and meaningful, something ARCI has never been able to do.

It is abundantly clear to anyone inside or outside of racing that our current state-based anti-doping, medication control and safety rule structure is not equipped to create national uniformity and set high standards for safety and integrity.

As we learned in March of 2020, it took the resources of the FBI and outside investigators to get the job done and bring justice to the blatant cheaters manipulating racing, while at the same time, laying bare the incompetence of the regulators that were supposed to be protecting the sport. The Jockey Club has long supported the creation of a nationwide approach grounded in federal law because we realize that horse racing, as a national sport, cannot survive if history keeps repeating itself and national uniformity is never achieved.

Yet once again, Ed Martin is defending the status quo. Don't let him rewrite a history that he deservedly owns.

James L. Gagliano, President and COO, The Jockey Club

The post Letters To The Editor: James Gagliano appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

FTC Delays Implementation of HISA’s Drug and Doping Program

In an order Monday, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act's (HISA) anti-doping and medication control (ADMC) program would not go into effect as scheduled Jan. 1 due to swirling legal uncertainty.

“The bedrock principle of the Act is the need for uniformity,” wrote the FTC in the order, adding that “the Commission's approval of the Anti-Doping and Medication Control proposed rule would not result in uniformity because the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act has been held unconstitutional by a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.”

Oral arguments similarly surrounding HISA's facial constitutionality were held last week in a separate case before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“The Commission therefore disapproves the proposed rule without prejudice. If the legal uncertainty regarding the Act's constitutionality comes to be resolved, the Authority may resubmit the proposed rule or a similar rule, and the Commission will consider all comments filed in this proceeding as well as any updated or new comments and filings.

“In the meanwhile, and until any future proposed rule on the subject is approved by the Commission, State law will continue to regulate the matters that the proposed rule would have covered,” the order states.

According to HISA's CEO Lisa Lazarus, who held an impromptu press conference Monday afternoon, this means that the current regulatory “status quo” will remain in place at the start of 2023.

“They made reference to the fact that, since the FTC has not approved any ADMC rules under HISA's authority, that means all the state rules remain in full force and effect,” said Lazarus, stressing that this was her “interpretation” of the FTC order.

“If there wasn't a clear statement on this issue quickly, then we might get to Jan. 1, and there might be some uncertainty around who actually has the authority. It's important for the states to know now that they're going to continue to be the ones in charge of testing on Jan. 1,” Lazarus added.

When it comes to the financial implications from Monday's announcement, HISA will refrain from collecting any of the 2023 fee assessments, designated for the individual states or, alternately, the racetracks, said Lazarus.

“The vast majority of those fees relate to the anti-doping program,” said Lazarus, explaining that the 2023 fees will be collected once the legal uncertainty has been resolved.

“There are still assessments being paid for 2022 that obviously are still required for the state racing associations who opted in, and the racetracks to cover, because those costs have already been incurred, or are in the process of being incurred,” she added.

Ben Mosier, executive director of the Horseracing Integrity & Welfare Unit (HIWU), the enforcement arm of HISA's ADMC program, released a statement explaining that HIWU will continue its education and outreach efforts “to all stakeholders in the Thoroughbred industry,” despite the delay in implementation.

“As HISA re-submits the draft ADMC rules for the FTC's approval, HIWU will use any additional time before implementation as an opportunity to ensure the industry is even more prepared for an efficient rollout of this Program, which will promote fair competition in the sport of Thoroughbred racing and the safety and welfare of our human and equine athletes,” wrote Mosier.

According to Lazarus, “So long as that preparatory work doesn't extend beyond two to three months, [HIWU's work] would still be covered by the 2022 budget.” However, “if it extends longer, we would have to revisit that issue.”

As for potential timelines moving forward, Lazarus explained that once the ADMC rules have been resubmitted with the FTC, it would take approximately 60 days for them to then go into effect, “assuming that the FTC was going to approve them substantively.”

Lazarus also broached a number of different scenarios in what appears to many in the industry a swirling morass of unpredictability and confusion.

Last month, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals found the law facially unconstitutional due to the lack of rule-making authority ceded to the FTC. That mandate is set to go into effect Jan. 10.

But if HISA is able to secure a stay on the Fifth Circuit's ruling in the interim, “we would then go back to the FTC [with the ADMC rules] and seek approval on that basis,” said Lazarus.

A similar case questioning HISA's constitutionality is also before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. According to Lazarus, a ruling in the Sixth Circuit is expected “in the next month or two.”

If the Sixth Circuit issues a ruling favourable to HISA, “it would potentially give us the ability to continue with our program in those jurisdictions the Sixth Circuit covers,” said Lazarus.

“And it would also potentially lead to the [U.S.] Supreme Court hearing the case,” said added.

Nevertheless, even if the Sixth Circuit issues a friendly ruling on HISA, the FTC still might prove reluctant to allow HISA's ADMC to go into effect in those jurisdictions as the new law wouldn't be implemented uniformly, said Lazarus.

“For that reason, it's very possible the FTC would maintain the position that we shouldn't resubmit our rules until we have clear ability to move forward and launch across the whole country,” said Lazarus.

Another potential fix to the current knot of legal problems is a congressional re-write of the rules to cede more rule-making power to the FTC. Lazarus declined to speculate on the likelihood and possibility of that option.

A number of experts have questioned whether the legal uncertainty surrounding HISA's constitutionality puts into jeopardy the law's racetrack safety rules, already in effect. Lazarus said that Monday's order has no effect on the racetrack safety prong of the program.

“This related solely to the ADMC rules, and also, it was not a substantive review,” said Lazarus. “It was a statement on their perspective with regards to the legal uncertainties and ensuring there's clarity before we launch the new program.”

Ed Martin, the Association of Racing Commissioners International's (ARCI) president and CEO, referenced a letter the organization sent last week to the FTC highlighting “a real Catch-22” come Jan.1 concerning the legality of HISA's ADMC program.

“We are appreciative that the FTC listened and considered the request of the Association of Racing Commissioners International not to create regulatory uncertainty on Jan. 1 by approving the proposed HISA rules,” Martin told the TDN.

“Whoever got brought up on a charge could potentially have appealed it ad nauseam, and maybe win, which means there might be no rules in effect. That was the danger here,” Martin speculated. “They might be mad at me for bringing it up, but it needed to be brought up.”

The following is HISA's full statement in response to the FTC order:

“HISA appreciates the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) decision to deny HISA's draft Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) rules without prejudice as we actively seek to resolve current legal uncertainties. HISA is eager to launch Thoroughbred racing's first and long-awaited national, uniform ADMC program and stands ready to do so. We will re-submit the draft ADMC rules to the FTC for their review as soon as these legal uncertainties are resolved, and once approved, we will implement the program through the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU). In the meantime, HIWU will continue to work toward the implementation of a uniform, independent anti-doping and medication control program that is administered consistently and fairly across the United States.”

In a statement, National HBPA CEO Eric Hamelback wrote, “The recent FTC decision is another positive step forward for horsemen in our battle against the unconstitutional takeover of our industry. The strength of our legal arguments led to a unanimous decision in the Fifth Circuit, and now the FTC has done the right thing in declining to defy a federal court that has found HISA unconstitutional. The FTC order is clear: state law continues to govern medication issues until our final victory in this case.”

 

The post FTC Delays Implementation of HISA’s Drug and Doping Program appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

HIWU’s Scollay: New Medication Rules ‘Your New Bible’

Despite all the legal jockeying these past few weeks and months, the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act's (HISA) anti-doping and medication control program still appears set for launch on Jan. 1 in the vast majority of states that conduct pari-mutuel wagering.

This means on the first day of 2023, thousands of trainers, veterinarians and other backstretch workers must grapple with a new set of rules guiding how and when to administer a set of everyday medications–the list of which can be found here–to avoid falling foul of a post-race and out-of-competition positive.

Is there much of a difference between the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ACRI)'s current therapeutic medication schedule and that as outlined by the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU)?

Turns out there is–one that, in short, boils down to the differences between the current world of withdrawal guidelines and thresholds, and the looming system of detection times and screening limits.

“There is a substantial difference and if the terms are used interchangeably, there is a profound risk of a medication violation,” warned Mary Scollay, chief of science at HIWU, established by Drug Free Sport International.

Some of the key points as Jan. 1 looms large:

 

  • Detection times do not necessarily provide an accurate medication withdrawal guide;

 

  • New screening limits will require different administration protocols;

 

  • There will be no enforcement “grace period” for stakeholders to adjust.

 

  • This different medication schedule will require adjustments well before Jan. 1;

 

Withdrawal Guidelines vs. Detection Times

Traditionally, withdrawal guidelines are based on administration studies with a “statistically derived margin of safety built in,” said Scollay.

“The idea is that if you follow the administration protocol described in the study–dose, route of administration–and you comply with the withdrawal guidance,” said Scollay, “you should have a high degree of confidence that you will not have a medication violation.”

In other words, withdrawal guidelines provide a reliable cut-off point to administer a medication to avoid post-race positives.

This is in contrast to detection times under HISA, calculated through studies on a group of horses administered a certain medication.

These horses are then tested to determine the earliest time the drug is eliminated from all the horses' systems–a level below either the lowest concentration identified by the laboratory or below a defined screening limit.

This means that detection times “do not have any margin of safety calculated in,” warned Scollay. “It is the starting point for determining a withdrawal interval. So, the burden for establishing an appropriate withdrawal interval for medication now lies exclusively with the horses' connections.”

In any of these given studies, for example, the horses may metabolize drugs at different speeds–and potentially quicker than a racehorse given the same drug at the same dose.

Studies with a very small cohort of horses–like hydroxyzine, with a detection time of 96 hours from a study with only two horses–provide another reason why detection times can provide a very thin margin of error.

Imagine a study testing a doorframe set at six feet, explained one regulatory veterinarian. If the study participants are all under six foot, no problem. But what about all the six-foot plus individuals not studied?

For practicing veterinarians accustomed to concrete withdrawal times, therefore, this constitutes a sea-change in the way medications can be safely prescribed and administered to avoid costly post-race positives.

“There's no easy answer to this,” admitted Scollay. “I fully understand what a philosophical change this is, and yes, I understand that the vets can feel like they're flying blind right now.”

Aim of Schedule

Aside from a select few substances–like electrolytes, orally administered vitamins and anti-ulcer medications which can be administered up to 24-hours before a race–there is a mandatory 48-hour restricted administration time for all controlled medications.

For a number of these routine controlled medications, the dosage, withdrawal time and stipulated threshold in the current ARCI schedule are the same as the dosage, detection time and screening limits outlined by HIWU.

But where these differ, the differences might be subtle, easily over-looked. The ARCI's phenylbutazone threshold is 0.3 micrograms per millimeter, but is 0.2 micrograms per millimeter under HISA, for example–a small change with significant implications when it comes to its use in the days prior to a race. What's more, Scollay is unable to provide veterinarians and horsemen with specific withdrawal numbers. “HIWU and HISA are not in a position to provide withdrawal guidance,” she said. “I cannot say, 'I think you're going to be fine if you back out to 82 hours.'”

Things can get even trickier when HIWU provides zero dosage, detection time and screening limit guidance on a drug listed on the controlled medication list. But that doesn't necessarily mean veterinarians and trainers are indeed “flying blind.”

The corticosteroid betamethasone has no dosage or detection time listed, but it comes with a Restricted Administration Time (RAT) to race of 14 days (7 days for a work).

The Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) diclofenac–commonly found in a topical ointment to treat swelling and inflammation–similarly has no listed dosage and detection time.

As Scollay explains, that's because the process of calculating elimination times in an ointment–and therefore, one routinely applied in wildly different amounts to different parts of the body–is extremely difficult.

But this underscores, she said, the overarching aim of the new medication schedule–to foster a more conservative approach to veterinary medicine.

If diclofenac is used to treat a problematic joint, said Scollay, “from my perspective, once you've got that joint quieted down, I think you'd still want to assess that horse's response to treatment and assess the horse's recovery by breezing him.

“And so, you're not talking about ceasing treatment on a specific joint that has been inflamed and problematic going into a race in three days.”

In other words, if a topical diclofenac ointment is being used to treat certain musculoskeletal problems, then racing probably shouldn't be on the horse's imminent agenda, said Scollay.

Clearance Testing

More broadly, there's a very rough rule-of-thumb when it comes to calculating withdrawal times. One is that a short detection time is typically indicative of fast elimination from the system, said Scollay.

“But if something takes 96 hours to clear, I would be more conservative because I know it clears slowly,” said Scollay, speculating that “if I add just 24 hours onto that, I may not have allowed enough time for it to clear.”

But perhaps the most accurate guide for veterinarians and trainers concerned about a positive test, said Scollay, would be to conduct “clearance testing” well before race-day–a service provided through HIWU.

“We'll collect the sample from the horse, and then send it to the laboratory that's doing the testing. The trainer would have to provide information about the treatment, the drug, the dose, the frequency–when it was halted,” said Scollay.

It's not a free service, however.

“I don't know what that fee is yet,” Scollay added. “That would be paid for by the horse's connections.”

Importantly, the new controlled medication rules are primarily germane to post-race testing, not HISA's out-of-competition testing program, which is largely focused on banned substances.

That said, the new rules prohibit the presence of more than one NSAID or corticosteroid in both post-race and post-work samples–a prohibition designed to nix the practice of “stacking.”

HIWU's new common controlled medication list provides secondary detection times for three common NSAIDS, to help avoid a stacking offense.

Enforcement

Though the new drug rules might prove a marked change from the current status-quo, don't expect an enforcement grace period for stakeholders to acclimatize to their new regulatory expectations.

“The regulations don't provide for it,” said Scollay, categorically.

So, what are some of the implications for a positive of a controlled substance? An outline of the sanctions can be found here.

The majority of post-race positives are for everyday therapeutic medications–like phenylbutazone, a class C controlled drug, a first time positive for which would result in a fine of up to $500 and the automatic disqualification of the horse.

Which leads to another question: Who will be held responsible in the event of a positive?

The ultimate-insurer rule places the burden of responsibility on the shoulders of the trainer. But in the language of the law, there appears to be room for the veterinarian (and perhaps others) to be similarly held culpable.

As Scollay describes it, such a scenario would be case-specific. “The facts of the case would have to determine who else might be complicit,” she said. “To be fair, if it's an overage of a medication one would say, 'well, the vet didn't administer that without the trainer's knowledge and consent.'”

And so, when should veterinarians, trainers and others start applying these new controlled medication rules?

Given the 14-day stand down on all intra-articular injections–along with a 15-day detection time for the NSAID firocoxib–Scollay recommends familiarization with, and application of, the new rules as soon as possible, to avoid regulatory consequences come Jan. 1.

In other words, if trainers and veterinarians are deciding on withdrawal decisions after a horse is entered to race after Jan. 1, “they've waited too long,” said Scollay.

“I think more important is for veterinarians and trainers to review the document together and develop a shared approach to interpreting detection times,” she said. “And there is no time like the present for that.”

Education

Between now and Jan. 1, HIWU will apparently be releasing educational materials aimed towards regulatory and practicing veterinarians, and the trainers themselves.

Another intended event, said Scollay, is a webinar with a noted European veterinarian to explain how detection times and screening limits translate in Europe, where they've been in effect for much longer. Scollay was unable to provide details about then that might be, however.

The Racing Medication and Testing Consortium (RMTC) can act as an information intermediary, said Scollay, who added that industry stakeholders can contact her directly with any drug-related questions.

She also recommends printing off HIWU's controlled medication list—once again linked to here–before laminating and pinning it to the barn wall.

“I've been using the 'L' word every chance I can get. Laminate it, put it on your clipboard. Give them to your staff. That's your new bible,” Scollay said.

“There's no easy answer to this other than be more conservative and be more cautious of medication than you have been,” she said. “And ask yourself, 'does this horse really need it?'”

The post HIWU’s Scollay: New Medication Rules ‘Your New Bible’ appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights