With the announcement of the brand new NRHA drug rule revisions, we’ve been onerous at work with individuals hitting the telephones to learn the way board members allegedly voted in “SediGate”. The availability to inject horses with a sedative half-hour previous to an occasion throughout warm-up occasions.
Within the open letter to all members, NRHA President Rick Clark, suggested it required a supermajority of 67% vote to cross the brand new drug guidelines and penalties; subsequently requiring 12 votes minimal. The president can solely vote in a tie-breaker, so he’s excluded. Folks can solely vote as soon as.
Clark goes on to jot down “Just like the trade, the board was cut up between the individuals who needed the coverage and people who have been in opposition to it. We didn’t have the assist to go to a no allowance for Romifidine (Sedivet) presently. We have been confronted with some unlucky however very probably eventualities if we didn’t get the assist we would have liked to enact some modifications.”
The Manner it Allegedly Went:
18 votes on the Board of Administrators and Government Committee:
- 4 voted – No to Sedivet – 22%
- 14 voted – Sure to Sedivet – 78%
Every individual can solely vote as soon as, even when on each the board and government committee.
Particular person member votes are proven under.
If a member of the Board of Administrators or Government Committee believes their vote is incorrectly reported, we invite the actual particular person to jot down to us and advise their vote, and we’ll instantly replace the knowledge.
These Sure voters are the individuals who, as acknowledged by Rick Clark, didn’t need any modifications to the foundations and agreed provided that Sedivet was included as an accredited drug.
With such a margin of distinction, the probability of Sedivet being voted out is very unlikely within the foreseeable future. The potential for the present new penalties being squashed or watered down is extraordinarily excessive.
With the outcry on social media, their voting actually doesn’t symbolize the membership’s needs.