484                                        VETOES

such owners of stock are the same persons who are majority officers
of, or owners of a majority of the stock of, any association or corpora-
tion licensed for the conduct of racing in an adjoining state.

Article 78B of the Annotated Code of Maryland sets out a com-
prehensive plan for the regulation of racing in Maryland. This
Article creates the Maryland Racing Commission and delegates de-
fined powers to it. Included in these powers is the authority to grant
licenses and to suspend or revoke licenses. However, Article 78B at
present does not contain specific prohibitions relating to the granting
of licenses, such as those set forth in House Bill No. 170. Rather, the
issuance, suspension and revocation of licenses is left to the sound dis-
cretion of the Commission acting consistently with the standards ex-
pressed in Article 78B. Moreover, Article 78B affords licensees the
right of appeal in the case of suspension or revocation.

House Bill No. 170 is clearly inconsistent with the basic regu-
latory approach reflected in Article 78B. House Bill No. 170 identifies
a particular set of circumstances as disqualifying. The conflict be-
tween these circumstances and the best interests of Maryland racing
is indeed obscure. On the other hand, Article 78B leaves such matters
to the considered judgment of the Maryland Racing Commission,
which would be familiar with the effect of specific situations on racing
in Maryland.

If House Bill No. 170 were to become law, it would simply be an
encouragement for special interests to seek patchwork legislation in
particular situations involving Maryland racing, rather that to entrust
such matters to the discretion of the Commission, which has been
established for the very purpose of providing a knowledgeable forum
for the decision of racing matters.

House Bill No. 170 presents obvious problems of construction.
For example, the word "families" is not limited in its scope and could
cause unwarranted discrimination in the issuance of racing licenses.

Assuming the applicability of House Bill 170 to an existing
Maryland licensee or licensees, enforcement of the Bill would interfere
with the management of licensees of neighboring states and could
easily create friction with administrative authorities in these states.
No justification for such a result has been brought to my attention.
The existence of this possibility alone constitutes a serious threat to
the efficient conduct of racing in Maryland because of the practical
necessity of close cooperation between regulatory authorities con-
cerned with racing in contiguous geographical areas.

For the above reasons, and because House Bill No. 170 represents
an undesirable and disruptive approach to the orderly regulation of
racing in Maryland, I was compelled to veto this Bill.

With kindest personal regards, I am

Sincerely yours,

(S) J. MILLARD TAWES,

Governor.