Simulcast Gambling on Dog Races is Dying

Gina is Happy That Greyhound Simulcasting is Dying

As the greyhound industry slowly dies, nineteen remaining tracks are being partially propped up by states that don't host races but allow gamblers to bet remotely on dog racing. As a result of this simulcast betting, states that have already outlawed greyhound racing, like Massachusetts, are unfortunately supporting animal cruelty.

Thankfully, greyhound simulcasting is withering. It is falling in virtually every state, with several experiencing catastrophic declines in just the past five years:

• In Massachusetts, greyhound simulcasting dropped by 32%, from $38.6 million to $26.2 million.

• In New Hampshire, greyhound simulcasting declined by a staggering 36%, from $21.4 million to $13.7 million.

• In Nevada, greyhound simulcasting fell by 19%, from $8.3 million to $6.7 million.

• In Oregon, greyhound simulcasting dropped by 23%, from $8 million to $6.2 million.

This is good news for greyhounds. It also refutes false claims that have been made recently by the industry. Just last month, National Greyhound Association Executive Secretary Gary Guccione told Kansas lawmakers that greyhound racing isn't dying at all because simulcasting is so successful. Obviously his claim is pure fantasy.

Even though greyhound simulcasting is dying, along with the rest of the dog race industry, it is still a problem that needs attention. These states shouldn't support greyhound cruelty, and it's time for them to get out of the dog racing business altogether.

Bay State Politicians Endorse Greyhound Cruelty

Greyhounds endure lives of confinement at Florida tracks

Last night, the Massachusetts Senate voted to again extend greyhound simulcasting, a practice that allows local gamblers to bet on dog races from other states. This action follows a similar vote in the state House of Representatives. As a result, it is a near certainty that tens of millions of dollars will continue to be bet every year on dog racing in Massachusetts, even though citizens overwhelmingly voted to outlaw this activity in 2008. Our ballot question was clear, and prohibited "any form of betting or wagering on the speed or ability of dogs."

At the same time, Senate leadership a rejected a proposal by eight lawmakers to finally end greyhound simulcasting and respect the will of the voters. We are very grateful for the courage of Senator Pat Jehlen, who was joined by Senators Jason Lewis, James Eldridge, William Brownsberger, Robert Hedlund, Ken Donnelly, Michael Barrett and Cynthia Creem. These lawmakers gave the greyhounds a voice, and deserve our thanks.

But in the end, the same Beacon Hill politicians who made a backroom deal on greyhound simulcasting in 2009 failed the voters again. They sided with racetrack owners and lobbyists, and their failure in leadership will have real consequences. For example, in Florida a racing greyhound is dying every three days. There are a dozen operational tracks in the Sunshine State, and those tracks remain open in part because gamblers from other states, including Massachusetts, are betting remotely on the races. More than $28 million was bet last year on greyhound simulcasting in Massachusetts, although the activity is dying. In just four years, the amount bet on greyhound simulcasting has declined by 24%, and is at its lowest level in decades.

Greyhound simulcasting has dropped by 24%

Thankfully, an effort is now underway to place a question before voters that will finally outlaw greyhound simulcasting in Massachusetts. The measure will also keep casino gambling out of the state, and is being led by a grassroots coalition named Repeal the Casino Deal. We are supporting this campaign, and are hopeful it will succeed. Although we have no position on casino gambling, their ballot question will now become one of our top national priorities because it also addresses greyhound simulcasting. We will work hard for its passage, and will reach out to other animal protection groups and ask them to also support this important proposal.

Enough is enough. If Massachusetts voters have to speak again on this issue, then so be it. We are confident they will side with the dogs, and finally end all state support for greyhound cruelty.

Candidates from the Left and Right Support Greyhound Protection Laws

Since the very beginning, our fight to pass greyhound protection laws has been a bipartisan effort. We are supported by lawmakers on both the right and left, and proud of this record. To me, it is a ray of hope in an age of unprecedented political gridlock.

That is why we recently supported Florida legislative candidate Mike Hill, a strong conservative and founder of the Northwest Florida Tea Party. It's also why we have endorsed Carl Sciortino, an unabashed liberal state lawmaker who is running for Congress.

Carl and Mike may not agree on many things, but they both believe that greyhounds deserve to be protected. That is why we have stood by both of them, along with dozens of other candidates, over the years. In fact we have supported more than 100 candidates over the past decade, and our endorsed candidates have won nearly 84% of the time.

There is no doubt that dog race promoters will go to virtually any lengths to protect their cruel industry. Many of these individuals are being heavily subsidized, and have a vested interest in the continuation of commercial greyhound racing. This is a fight between our people and their money and muscle, and we can only be successful by working with lawmakers who are compassionate and courageous.

If you live in the 5th congressional district in Massachusetts, please vote for Carl Sciortino on Tuesday. Wherever you live, consider making a donation to Carl's campaign today so he can continue his work as a public servant. As a community, we have a responsibility to stand with the lawmakers who have given greyhounds a voice.