VOLUME 9 - 2016-2017 - ISSUE 1
9 Ky. J. Equine, Agric. & Nat. Resources L. 37 (2017).
PITTS VS. BARR-TONKO BILLS: AN IN-DEPTH COMPARISON OF PROPOSED ANTI-DOPING LEGISLATION IN HORSE RACING
Article Written By: Peter J. Sacopulos, Esq.
Changing an established procedure or method often results in strong positions. Horse racing is no exception. Although many in the industry feel that the current methods and laws for medicating race horses are in need of improvement, as Figure 1 demonstrates, exactly how this matter is dealt with has organizations, owners, trainers, jockeys, and animal advocates arguing about the best way to do just that.1 Whether you like it or not, the horse has left the barn on this issue. Just over a year ago, the most recent versions of two-horse, anti-doping bills were introduced before Congress: The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act of 2015 (“HR 2641”) filed on June 3, 2015 by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA), 2 and The Thoroughbred Horseracing Integrity Act of 2015 (“HR 3084”), filed on July 16 by Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY).3 Although similar in many ways, each has a different scope regarding the types of racing to be regulated.