This bill authorizes States to form an interstate compact that establishes the Racehorse Health and Safety Organization (RHSO). The RHSO will develop uniform, breed-specific rules on medication control and racetrack safety, assign committees to craft scientific thresholds and track protocols, and provide a national structure for investigations, testing, and discipline.
The measure centralizes many technical functions currently handled by State racing authorities: it creates standing scientific and safety committees, sets an accreditation and testing regime for laboratories and racetracks, requires breed-specific funding from member States, and preempts conflicting State rules within member States. For anyone who manages racing operations, performs testing, advises owners or trainers, or handles wagering across state lines, the bill changes the regulatory landscape from patchwork state regimes to a compact-governed model with national standards and enforcement tools.
At a Glance
What It Does
Permits States to enter an interstate compact to form the RHSO, which writes and enforces breed-specific medication and racetrack safety rules. The RHSO recommends rules through technical committees, accredits testing labs and racetracks, and can investigate and refer violations to member State commissions.
Who It Affects
State racing commissions, racetracks, trainers, owners, veterinarians, testing laboratories, and organizations that represent horsemen and breed registries — plus wagering hosts because member host States may exclude interstate off-track wagering from non-member States.
Why It Matters
The bill shifts technical rulemaking and enforcement from a wholly State-driven patchwork to a multi-State compact with centralized accreditation, data collection, and disciplinary processes; that consolidation will create uniform thresholds and operational standards but also impose new funding, compliance, and oversight obligations on the industry.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The core operating model is an interstate compact that produces a single multistate regulatory body (the RHSO). Member States enact a statutory consent clause and then work through the RHSO to adopt breed-by-breed medication and safety rules.
The RHSO itself is governed by a nine-member board that directs technical committees, approves rules, and oversees lab and racetrack accreditation. States may either retain enforcement locally or delegate enforcement to the RHSO under memoranda of understanding.
Technical expertise lives in standing committees: one scientific medication control committee per breed and a single Racetrack Safety Committee. Those committees draft scientifically grounded proposals — including lists of permitted/prohibited substances, quantitative thresholds, testing protocols, and safety protocols for track surfaces and injury reporting — and present them to the Board.
Committee meetings that propose rules must be publicly noticed in advance and allow covered persons to provide input; committee membership mixes scientific experts and industry appointees from national breed organizations.Funding and administration are practical levers in the bill. The RHSO can charge initial startup fees and then require annual, breed-specific contributions from member States; States determine how to collect those fees (for example, foal registration or track fees) but must keep breed funds separate.
The RHSO will select an accreditation body for laboratories, require national laboratory relationships for accredited labs, and can direct samples to specialized labs when needed. Enforcement tools include subpoenas, tests (including no-advance-notice testing), a disciplinary framework with administrative sanctions (up to lifetime bans and purse disgorgement), and procedures that provide for hearings, appeals, and an expectation of timely decisions.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Section 3 repeals the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act of 2020, removing that federal framework and replacing it with a compact-based system.
The RHSO board consists of 9 directors: five appointed (one each) by the State racing commissions of the five States with the most racing days over the prior three years, and four appointed by the remaining member States.
The Board must adopt medication, safety, and violation rules by a two-thirds majority and must post proposed rules and meeting notices in advance (45 days for website posting; committees hold an open meeting 90 days before formal Board consideration).
Annual RHSO funding is collected as breed-specific assessments remitted by member State racing commissions; States may use foal registration, sales contributions, starter or track fees, but may not commingle funds across breeds and a proposed increase over 5 percent requires a three-fourths Board vote.
Each scientific medication control committee has seven members: three regulatory appointees chosen by the Board for subject-matter expertise and four industry appointees named by breed organizations (U.S. Trotting Association, American Quarter Horse Association, or National Horsemen’s Benevolent & Protective Association), with required expertise including a statistician, exercise physiologist, pharmacologist, and analytical chemist.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Repeal of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act of 2020
This provision eliminates the federal statute enacted in 2020 that previously governed national medication and safety standards. Practically, the repeal clears legal overlap and makes space for the compact-based RHSO to become the primary multistate authority for member States. That transfer means existing HISA contracts, testing protocols, and governance arrangements will need operational transition plans once member States adopt the compact.
Establishes the RHSO and the Board's authority
Member States create the RHSO and a nine-member governing board. The Board’s duties reach from rule adoption to database creation, subpoena power, and oversight of committees and accreditation. The Board must base adopted rules on generally accepted scientific principles and peer-reviewed data where possible and must hold open meetings for proposed technical rules. The Board also handles initial startup assessments and a permanent fee schedule and can approve borrowing for operations but cannot accept loans from industry participants.
Breed-specific Scientific Medication Control Committees and rules
The RHSO sets up a separate scientific medication control committee for Thoroughbreds, Standardbreds, and Quarter Horses. Each committee drafts breed-specific medication lists, thresholds, withdrawal guidelines, testing plans (including intelligence-based and no-advance-notice testing), and penalty recommendations. Committees combine scientific appointees and industry-named members, must provide public notice of rule-development meetings, transcribe stakeholder input into the record, and review new medications continuously for possible inclusion.
Racetrack Safety Committee and racetrack accreditation standards
The Racetrack Safety Committee drafts uniform, breed-specific track, training, and injury-reporting standards. The rules can cover permitted and prohibited track surfaces and set a racetrack accreditation process the RHSO will enforce. The Committee consults State commissions and existing model standards when developing rules and may provide provisional accreditation paths for racetracks that meet certain existing alliance or association standards while they upgrade to full RHSO accreditation.
Prohibited acts, results management, and sanctions
The bill defines a wide set of prohibited acts (non-therapeutic substances, excessive therapeutic levels, sample refusals, tampering, intimidation, and aiding violations). It requires the RHSO to implement investigation procedures, hearings, and a schedule of administrative sanctions that can include fines, purse disgorgement, order-of-finish changes, suspensions, and lifetime bans. The disciplinary framework includes due process protections — impartial tribunals, counsel, confront witnesses, a transcribed record, and a 60-day target for decisions — and creates a rebuttable presumption of trainer liability for medication violations.
Effective dates and transition rules
Most provisions take effect two years after enactment or when at least two States join the compact; technical committees and rulemaking provisions become operative 90 days after that date. The bill phases implementation, giving States time to enact the required compact-consent language, stand up the RHSO, set up funding mechanisms, and prepare labs and racetracks for accreditation.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Agriculture across all five countries.
Explore Agriculture in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Racetrack operators seeking consistent standards: uniform accreditation and safety protocols reduce the need to comply with a different set of rules at every State meet, simplifying operations and inter-state racing.
- Testing laboratories with national relationships: the RHSO’s accreditation regime creates demand for accredited labs and for labs that can partner with national facilities, benefiting labs that can scale to meet breed-specific test needs.
- Breed organizations and national horsemen groups: they gain formalized seats in committee appointments and a defined process to influence thresholds and protocols for their members.
- Bettors and wagering platforms in member States: standardized medication and safety oversight can increase confidence in race integrity and, because host member States can exclude wagers from non-members, may expand the market consistency for interstate wagering within the compact.
Who Bears the Cost
- Member State governments and racing commissions: required to remit breed-specific fees, set up collection systems, and, where chosen, perform enforcement under the compact; administrative and legislative work to opt into the compact creates fiscal and staff demands.
- Trainers and owners: increased testing, stricter breed-specific thresholds, public disclosure obligations, and potential for stronger disciplinary sanctions raise compliance costs and risk of loss of income from suspensions or purse forfeiture.
- Racetracks failing to meet new accreditation standards: facilities may face capital expenditures to upgrade surfaces, maintenance systems, and safety staffing to retain accreditation or only receive provisional status.
- Smaller or regional labs: accreditation requirements and expectations of national laboratory relationships may impose investment and operational burdens that favor larger, well-resourced labs.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between consistent, science-driven national standards that improve horse welfare and betting integrity and the loss of local control and redistributional effects: consolidating technical authority streamlines expertise and enforcement but imposes collective funding, raises capture risks through industry appointments, and may sideline State-specific practices or smaller stakeholders who cannot absorb accreditation and compliance costs.
The bill pushes a technically complex sport toward centralized, science‑based regulation, but several implementation questions could shape outcomes. Funding is breed-specific and collected by States, which preserves local collecting authority but creates potential mismatches between where costs fall and where racing revenue is earned; States must also keep funds segregated by breed, which complicates administration.
Centralizing lab accreditation and the RHSO’s ability to direct samples to specialty labs will improve technical consistency but risks capacity bottlenecks and higher per-sample costs, especially for rarer or highly specialized assays.
Governance and legitimacy depend on the mix of scientific experts and industry-appointed members on committees and the Board. The bill requires scientific grounding for rules but also gives industry groups formal appointment power; that structure may accelerate rule acceptance but raises conflicts-of-interest and capture concerns the RHSO must manage.
Finally, the compact preemption clause and the prohibition on interstate wagering by non-member host States are powerful levers that could catalyze rapid expansion of membership — or provoke litigation and interstate friction if non-member States or industry stakeholders challenge exclusions or perceive unfair redistribution of costs and access.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.