Letters to the Editor: John Hamilton, Kirk Robison

JOHN HAMILTON, DARBY DAN FARM:

Having read the recent letters this week in TDN regarding owners’ frustration about getting fingerprinted repeatedly, I can shed some light on this.

First off, the complaining and whining in the media will probably not help. It merely causes the culprits to burrow further into the sand.

No one would like to see a uniform acceptance of the initial set of fingerprints by all the state racing jurisdictons more than me. OMG. I deal with owners all the time in my job. I have been in the Thoroughbred business for 33 years and during my seven years in the 1980s-90s as Executive Director of the TOBA, I served on the RCI’s codification of rules committee. It is there that I was able to look under the tent flap and fully understand the problem.

Simply put, here is the problem, and it is not going to change anytime soon. Each state racing commission has as its core responsibility with respect to licensing…verification that each person applying for an owners license has no felonies on his or her record. Pure and simple. THAT is the issue. They do not want to allow the public to bet on horses owned by felons. And that is a fair concern.

Under the current arrangement, the only way a state racing commission can be sure of that is to clear that applicant through the FBI with a new recent criminal records check. The only way they can do that is with a new, recent set of fingerprints sent to the FBI. Sadly, they cannot just call or email and “check out” this person, or plug into the FBI computer bank themselves. That would make too much sense. It lies safely protected as a right to privacy issue.

When I was with the TOBA, this issue was top of mind among our members, just as it is today. The solution I sought back then was for the FBI to allow each state to check out an applicant instantaneously–the computer technology to do this was in place even 25 years ago–it is even more available and high-tech today in the same way police and other officials key in a driver’s license and have immediate on-line access (in their cars!) to that person’s complete police record. It seemed to me back then that seeing if a person is a felon by each state racing office having access to the FBI computer bank, was a slam-dunk solution to the problem (the agony of owners from repeated fingerprinting). Alas, the FBI will not allow this. A new set of fingerprints are required and each state racing commission must keep getting them. In the FBI’s view, it remains a privacy issue even though the applying body is in itself ALSO a government agency. Aaaahhhhhhhh!!

Further, for other license applicants besides owners (grooms, out-riders, trainers, jockeys, patrol judges, etc.) there is no state-to-state reciprocity or agreement as to what levels of criminal activity are allowed for these type applicants to get licensed. That’s right. Each state has its own opinion and they cannot agree among themselves–so there is no accepted uniform code on allowed or not allowed criminal activity. States vary in their level of tolerance on this issue (Remember telling your teenage daughter, “I don’t care what all the other parents are allowing, these are our rules young lady.”)

If you’re not howling in despair by now at the ridiculousness of it all, understand that there are plenty of “rules” in various state racing commissions that are routinely overlooked. Such as: in most states the owners of racetracks cannot race their own horses at the track they own. Why? Because the public bets on these races and thus the perception that the owner somehow has an “advantage” for his horse through his ownership of the premises. We know this is not true, and is a silly rule… yet, it is in place in many states and we know it is routinely ignored. As it should be!

How many felons are actually turned up from this maddening policy? Less than 1%. This reminds me of when my father and I were arguing over nothing, back when I was a child and my mother had had enough and grabbed the silverware drawer, started shaking it, and yelled out “STOP!” I still remember all those spoons and forks jumping up and down. The madness of it all.

So, where are we on the fingerprinting malaise? Nowhere. It would take a groundswell political movement through all industry strata, which would include all vocational groups within the industry and all the alphabet soup of organizations– including the state racing commissions–all working together to seek influence over time to convince the FBI to allow access from each state with only one set of fingerprints AND then get reciprocity from each state racing commission so they will accept the initial fingerprints taken in another state.

Ever tried herding cats?

KIRK ROBISON, OWNER AND BREEDER:

We race about 40 horses and last year had to process owner licenses in 13 states. Sometimes we only have one starter in a state the entire year. How about one license for all jurisdictions? Bureaucracies do what bureaucracies do: perpetuate the status quo. It is not in their interest to change. And how about this idea right out of the 1940’s that Jockey Club papers follow the horse. How about online papers and electronic verification? It is easier to ship a horse than to get the papers sent from one track to another. Licenses should be multi-year and multi-state unless there is a change in material information. The barriers to financial success in racing are expected; but why is it so hard to just navigate the rules?