Ban Greyhound Racing Simulcasts in Massachusetts, Charity Tells Lawmakers
Posted on: September 30, 2021, 03:28h.
Last updated on: September 30, 2021, 09:23h.
The president of greyhound charity Grey2K USA Worldwide has urged lawmakers in Massachusetts to ban simulcast dog racing. That’s “to honor the will of the voters,” local NBC affiliate 22 News reports.
Christine Dorchak told that to the Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure this week. The move came to encourage them to pledge support for an amendment recently added to Massachusetts’ draft sports betting bill that would end the practice.
Massachusetts residents voted to ban live dog racing and betting on races in 2008, following a ballot initiative drafted by Dorchak. The live racing ban came into effect in 2010. But that year, lawmakers created a temporary extension for simulcast betting to help safeguard the state’s ailing racetracks and protect jobs.
Simulcasting allows gamblers to wager on races broadcast elsewhere in the US and other countries.
Death of Thoroughbred Racing
The expectation was the tracks would one day be granted full-fledged casino licenses, but none of them were. Voters approved casino gaming in 2011. But the only racetrack to benefit was live harness venue Plainridge Park, which was permitted to open a slots parlor.
Suffolk Downs joined forces with Mohegan Sun to bid for the sole east Massachusetts casino license. But the gaming commission chose Wynn Resorts instead. Many in the thoroughbred racing industry felt betrayed by the decision.
Live thoroughbred horse racing came to an end in Massachusetts in June of 2019, when Suffolk Downs ran its last race. The historic track is now earmarked for redevelopment.
But year after year, the legislative extensions have continued, most recently in July 2021. Along with Suffolk Downs and Plainridge Park, greyhound racing simulcasts are still permitted at Raynham Park, itself a former dog track.
“What does that say?” asked Dorchak, as reported by News 22. “That says that the voters here in Massachusetts voted to not allow the racing of greyhounds because it was cruel. But it’s OK if you use those same cruel practices somewhere else and we can just watch it. I don’t believe the voters ever thought that was going to happen.”
“And it is against the will of the voters of Massachusetts to support and subsidize the cruelty of dog racing, whether it’s here or outside this country,” she added.
Dog Days of Greyhound Racing?
Grey2K USA is eager to seize the moment. Sports betting is in the pipeline in Massachusetts and could provide new revenue streams for tracks that would allow them to phase out far less lucrative dog racing simulcasts. Current legislation would allow retail sports books in at least two racetracks.
Meanwhile, live dog racing is on its last legs in the US. It’s currently illegal in 41 states, and Arkansas and Iowa plan to discontinue the sport by the end of next year. That would leave just two remaining tracks in the country hosting races, both in West Virginia.
Voters in Florida, formerly the epicenter of greyhound racing in US, chose to ban the sport at the 2018 ballot.
According to Grey2K USA World, dog races account for less than 25 percent of the simulcast betting in Massachusetts, with horse racing widely favored.
Related News Articles
PA Media Horse Racing Analyst Cooked Results to Win Bets
Philip Conneller
— August 19, 2021
New Jersey Horsemen Seek $3.4M from NCAA, Big Four Sports Leagues
Devin O'Connor
— December 27, 2020
Most Popular
Most Commented
Most Read
LOST VEGAS: First Documented ‘Trick Roll’ by a Prostitute
Corey Levitan
— September 9, 2024
Last Comments ( 2 )
1. Dog racing is only illegal in ONE state - Idaho. Parimutuel wagering is illegal in other states, thus precluding dog racing. Florida also did not ban dog racing. They banned the wagering on live dog racing. 2. Greyhound racing is not cruel and no one in the racing cimmunity has ever been convicted of animal cruelty. The welfare of the racing greyhound is highly regulated, and they are well-loved and cared for by many oeople from burth through adoption. 3. Lobbyist organizations, like Grey2K, prey on the emotions of the animal-loving public and legislators by using information out of context, doctoring photographs, and portraying themselves as greyhound welfare experts, which tbey are not. When will journalists learn to do "follow the money," do some real, not just superficial, research and present some uniased and balanced reporting?
This small but vocal activist group skews statistics and tells only what they want you to hear. Greyhound racing now has 100% adoption following their retirement or if they don’t race. At the track they get massages, whirlpools, and vet care 24/7. Pets don’t have this but this activist group will never tell the public that because it doesn’t suit their cause. During the 2018 campaign to end wagering in Florida, they swiped MY photo of a happy greyhound begging for a cookie off of social media and transformed it into a sad poster dog of their campaign, despite me hiring a lawyer to send them a letter to remove it! Their statistics of “deaths” at the track actually included deaths of natural causes that happen in all breeds. Additionally, they used the year dog flu went around in Florida to make things worse. Greyhounds actually fared better than pets during this. If this group was concerned about wagering and greyhound safety, why didn’t they include outside wagering in that 2008 bill? They didn’t because they wanted it to pass, so they now return to finish off what other states rely on for income that they have removed from MA. Lawmakers should choose to go see the racing community themselves and meet the people who have loved this breed for generations. Don’t vote to pass this unless you do, because you will see this group of hardworking people are being needlessly demonized.