Quote:
|
Originally Posted by oracle80
No threat, and I'm still waiting to hear about my original intent, which was to discuss and aprk debate(and yeah, I had you targeted when I made teh first post, but no to go where you took it all).
I thught when I posted it would spark a useful thread, and it still might, I think I had a very valid point.
|
I'm a fan, but fairly well-read and I wager enough to make it worthwhile to try to know what's going on to the extent i can educate myself.
Here's what I think.
Misuse of drugs, legal and otherwise, is far greater than the average person thinks. If people like Assmussen, Pletcher, Norman, etc are running into problems, it's not hard to expect that misuse at lower levels is far more prevalent.
At the same time, I think misuuse of drugs is less prevalent than the more jaded 'conspiracy-theorist' people say.
Since the sport is regulated at the state levels, the things I read about there needing to be federal-level oversight of medication use strikes me as senseless, empty rhetoric. It will not happen, or perhaps I should say it will surprise the hell out of me if it does happen. There are just too many dollars flowing to the various states and too many diverse state interests for me to believe there will be any movement in that direction.
I look at it this way. There is arguably some federal-level interest in a single set of regulations governing horse racing but to me it irrefutably pales in comparison to similar state-federal issues, most notably insurance.
The insurance industry dwarfs horse racing and while there are some federal mandates included in many insurance policies (ERISA, COBRA and treatment of certain conditions), the business is nearly totally state regulated.
I think it's possible, but not likely that there could be some positive outcomes if the NTRA or other nationally based industry group proposes model governing guidelines but only if there is sufficient interest at the state leves to press for their adoption.
The problem I see in applying this to racing is that the racing commissions seem to not have as much clout in their business as do the various state insurance commissioners.
I think the greatest hope is for continued high-profile suspensions and fines. I feel for good trainers who get "caught" with trivial overages, but at the same time it's potentially good in the long run if there is sufficient sentinel effect on other trainers. The downside of being in favor of stiffer penalties and fines is that I'm likely to be wrong and that misuse will just continue to grow especially at the lower levels of the sport irrespective of how many household name trainers get suspended.
I wish I was more optimistic.