ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Horseracing Integrity Act deserves support

| Friday, March 30, 2018, 8:57 p.m.

Many racetracks and racing organizations support the Horseracing Integrity Act, U.S. House Resolution 2651, which would provide an independent, uniform national doping system for horse racing. Unfortunately, Penn National Gaming, based in Pennsylvania and owner of several racetracks, has not offered its support. Fans would think that doping horses to cheat during races in Pennsylvania is not an issue. But they'd be wrong.

Last summer, Penn National trainer Stephanie Beattie admitted to habitually and illegally doping horses she trained, testifying at the trial of another Penn National trainer convicted of doping racehorses that “almost everybody did” and “It was a known practice. We wanted to win and they weren't testing for those drugs at that time.”

Whether you are a current horse-racing fan who feels deceived by the industry or a former fan who no longer watches racing because you are fearful of witnessing another horse break down on the track and die, please contact Penn National Gaming and urge the company to get on the right side of history and support this bill. Contact your congressmen to urge support as well. The integrity of the sport and the fate of our equine athletes depend on this bill's passage.

Katie Thorne

Bloomfield

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me