Right now I should be on the road to Chicago but I had to
delay my departure to put down some thoughts on the passage of the Horse Racing
Purse Enhancement legislation that was passed yesterday by the Minnesota House
and now awaits action by the Governor.
While it was an exciting time for Minnesota horse owners
and breeders, it was a bit of an uneasy time for me. I was watching state legislators, folks that
we elect to represent us, sound off about things that they obviously knew
little about. Joe Drape’s expose in The
New York Times was sourced by one lawmaker who really couldn’t explain how the
article relates to Canterbury Park. She even
mentioned several times that “I understand that this isn’t happening in our
state”, yet on she yammered. As a point
of reference, the Times piece cited $7,500 claiming horses racing for $40,000
(now a thing of the past since emergency regulations just went into effect in
New York capping a purse at two times the claiming price) and unsound horses
being pushed just to get a piece of the pot.
The reality in Minnesota is that this season $7,500
claimers will race for a purse of $10,000.
At maximum impact of 40% (a guesstimate, of course), the purse will “skyrocket”
to $14,000. This is a far cry from
$40,000, still under the new New York threshold and certainly nowhere near
enough money to encourage any kind of chicanery or animal mistreatment.
Another representative was screaming foul because this
potentially “controversial” legislation wasn’t screened by the hearing
process. I can understand that a
thorough vetting process of any legislation is ideal, however the last minute
compromise struck by the Native Americans and the racetrack was a bit late in
the process for that. Additionally,
amendments are passed all the time that impact legislation and are debated
openly on the floor of the State House chambers – this is nothing new. Finally, the two major combatants were on the
same side on this one! What became
apparent was that this rep viewed the amendment as an “expansion of gambling”. I wonder if she feels the same way when
Native casinos knock down a wall to add 250 more slot machines or a new bar
gets a pull-tab license or a new convenience store registers to sell lottery
tickets? The state has already
authorized table games and gambling at the race tracks and their expansions
should be treated the same way. Hell,
even the local community was supportive of the measure. This was an example of a local business
expanding what it is already legally doing – and gaining the support of its detractors
before doing it. It looked to me that
there was more personal agenda than policy concerns at work with this rep.
Another rep, from what I understand a longtime opponent
of gambling, wanted to know how the non-racehorse breeder’s in her district
were to benefit from this “bonus” that was being given to the racetracks. Uh, the racino legislation proposal provided
money for all horse breeds in the state. She was adamantly opposed to that as
well. It was completely disingenuous for
her to claim she was just looking out for her poor constituents who were going
to be burned by this “bonus” when she didn’t want a proposal that would help
them see the light of day.
Finally, and I’ve saved the best for last. This was so incredulous to me that I
literally laughed out loud in my living room watching the hearing last night. Our friend, the New York Times aficionado
mentioned above, told the House that she has some experience with racehorses
because some young girls in Oregon that she knows have a great-grand-daughter
of Secretariat. I thought she was
kidding at first, but she followed that up with the statement that she didn’t
think that any other member of the body had ever been so close to racing
greatness. But wait! There’s more!
When a representative arose to counter her expertise by saying that his
first job was a horse ranch manager that included quarter horses among other
breeds and not only does he understand racing, but all the economics that go
along with it, she actually stood up and re-established her claim of expertise
over him because she touched the progeny of the progeny of the progeny of one
of the greatest racehorses that ever lived. I swear to you that this is true –
and I’m embarrassed to say that it happened here.
For this rep’s edification, Secretariat sired
approximately 600 foals. Let’s assume
that between mares and horses those children produced another 1800 animals. Triple again for one more generation and then
you have over 5,000 potential great-grandchildren of Secretariat. You go back one more generation on her dam’s
side and our very own Tabby Lane is a descendant of Secretariat! My point is, dear representative, your
experience is NOT a unique one NOR does it make you an expert. Quite frankly, you look ill-informed when you
make such ludicrous claims.
Eventually, after all the brouhaha calmed down, the
measure passed overwhelmingly and was sent to Governor Mark Dayton for
signature. Since he started the process
of the track and tribes working together I find it highly unlikely that he’ll
veto it and finally, for the first time in a long time, a racing season begins
with hope rather than angst.
Congratulations to both the tracks and Tribes for sitting
down together and getting a deal done. I
hope that the lines of communication stay open for a long time to come – more can
be done working together than pulling apart.
Of course the lawyers and lobbyists may feel differently…
1 comment:
I am laughing and cheering, Ted! Awesome, simply awesome article and spot on. Thanks for taking the time from your trip to Chicago to so sussinctly summarize the embarrassing testimony heard yesterday. As the saying goes..."Better to not speak at all and be thought a fool, than to speak up and remove all doubt."
Post a Comment