Chuck offers rational response to invitation for Federal intervention

[paulo537]

I read the article and while I thought it was good, I don't share the same level of enthusiasm as others. I do agree the problem is a lack of consistent medication policy across the sport but I would ask these questions:

1. How much longer should fans and gamblers be asked to wait until the sport starts to manage the issue itself?

2. What makes US horse racing so very different than racing in other countries with much stricter medication rules?

3. Why don't we have penalties on owners for medication violations? If trainers are held strictly liable, why not owners?

I also found the paragraph where he asked why "these well-heeled people don't ... just prove the theory yourself without dragging the rest of the racing industry down with you?" to be rather odd.

4. Who are these people? And, why should anyone who doesn't want to invest in the negative expectation business of horse ownership be expected to prove anything to anyone?