The $80 Million Gaslight: Who is HISA Really Protecting?

The $80 Million Shell Game: Why the HISA ‘Lab Fee’ Defense is Gaslighting the Industry

You Tell Me, Who is Being Dishonest?

In the wake of Louis Masry (Westlake Stable) spotlighting the glaring red flags in HISA’s 2026 budget, a familiar defender has emerged. Their argument is a beginners class in pedantry: they point to a single $1 million decrease in “Lab Testing” fees as proof of fiscal responsibility. They accuse critics of being “dishonest” for looking at the gross budget instead of their cherry-picked line items.

But as any horseman who has had to balance a barn book knows, you don’t pay the gasoline bill and ignore the price of the truck. Here is the truth about the $80 million machine we are being forced to fund.

1. The “Supplies” Shell Game

The defenders claim “Lab Testing” costs are down from $20.5M to $19.5M. This is a deliberate half-truth. HISA’s own budget documents (including Appendix 4 of the FTC filing) admit that HIWU took over the sourcing of equipment (tubes, syringes) and shipping logistics. Those costs didn’t disappear; they were reclassified. By moving logistics out of the “Lab” line and into “Supplies” and “HIWU Operations,” HISA created a statistical illusion of savings. It is the accounting equivalent of moving your mortgage payment to your “entertainment” budget and claiming your house is now free.

2. The “Incompetence” Defense

The loudest defense from the Jockey Club camp is that we shouldn’t look at the $78.4 million “Proposed” budget because HISA “invariably” spends less than it asks for.

Think about the arrogance of that defense. In an industry where racetracks are shuttering and owners are bleeding out, we are being told it’s “dishonest” to criticize a regulator for over-assessing the industry by as much as 40%. Taking millions of dollars in excess capital from struggling stakeholders—holding it as an interest-free loan for a year—isn’t fiscal management. It’s a shakedown. If a CEO over-invoiced their clients by 40% every year, they’d be fired, not defended.

3. The Reality of the $1,000 Test

The industry doesn’t pay a “Lab Fee.” We pay an Assessment. For 2026, HISA is asking to assess the industry $77.1 million. If you have an “Integrity Machine” that costs $77 million to exist—including $7M in salaries, $3M for a legal war chest to sue its own members, and millions for “phantom” consultants—and that machine produces 76,000 tests, then the all-in cost of a test is $1,014.

To suggest we should ignore the overhead required to deliver that test is like a restaurant charging you $100 for a burger and telling you it’s a bargain because the meat only cost $5. We are paying for the building, the waiters, and the owner’s legal fees.

4. Mickey Mouse Results at Luxury Prices

The ultimate dishonesty isn’t in the math—it’s in the mission. For $80 million, the industry expects a net that catches the sharks: the doping rings, the sophisticated PED users, and the “reverse-cheating” syndicates that use tranquilizers to finish “up the track.” I get paid a huge $0. I have never been invited to a meeting, asked to be on a committee or panel. Yet I know that and apparently they don’t. Why?

Instead, we are getting a microscope focused on nanograms of therapeutic overages. We are spending luxury-suite money for the most part to catch trainers for the equivalent of a human athlete taking an extra Aspirin, while the real manipulators operate in the shadows of the untested field.

Accountability, Not Apologetics

To the defenders who call these facts “histrionics”: the industry is tired of being lectured by people who simply support a failing status quo. We don’t want a “touch lower” lab invoice. We want a regulator that manages its budget with the same discipline we have to use, and a program that delivers real integrity, not just expensive press releases.

The Questions HISA Won’t Answer

As we watch this $80 million machine stumble toward the wire, I have a few questions for the people guarding the vault:

1. On Accountability: If HISA “invariably” spends less than it asks for, why are you still demanding nearly $80 million upfront from an industry drowning in costs?
2. On the “Phantom” Millions: Why has $0 been allocated to repaying startup loans in the 2026 budget while executive salaries and “Professional Services” continue to balloon?
3. On Intelligence: Why are we spending millions on “Intelligence and Strategy” when you have yet to uncover a single major PED ring or address the rampant “reverse-cheating” (tranquilizing horses to finish up-the-track) that doesn’t involve the winner’s circle?
4. On Uniformity: If the goal is a level playing field, why is the enforcement focus on “gotcha” chemistry for therapeutics instead of the sophisticated blood doping that actually moves the needle?

The industry is tired of “keyboard commentary” from people who have nothing substantial to bring to the table. We are tired of being told to “ratchet back” our concerns while the people in the front office get rich. It’s time for HISA to stop looking for the wire and start looking for the real cheaters—or get out of the way for someone who can.

Mic drop.

People can disagree without hating one another. How boring would life be if we all agreed on everything. We can have different opinions without calling one who disagrees dishonest. You can always disagree with me, if you want to be wrong.

You tell me. Who is dishonest?

The Best is Yet to Come, Finished, Not by a Longshot: