Last month, in an open session of congress on the Tydings’ PAST Act, Kurt Schrader stated “I agree that the AVMA is the indisputable, that it is indisputable that soring causes horses unnecessary and unacceptable level of pain. These horses…it’s horrible when you see them. You see what’s going on the legs of these horses. They used to actually use sodering irons sometimes to get the pain to blister the horses legs so that they would react to these chains in an exaggerated manner. I saw that.” In reference to the AVMA, “These are the medical experts, that say pads and chains cause harm to the horses. I believe the veterinarian experts. There is no doubt.”

In the same congressional session on the Past Act, Ted Yoho said “Dr. Schrader and I are both equine vets, the only ones in the house. We know this. We have seen this. We have dealt with this…”

These are untrue statements. Neither, in their veterinarian practices, saw or dealt with anything related to horses wearing padded horse shoes. Their mis-education comes from the lobbying arms of the AVMA (The AVMA has spent $490,000.00 this year lobbying for the Past Act and other bills), ASPCA, HSUS and animal rights groups.

While the AVMA does support the Past Act, they have never said that pads or action devices cause harm to the horses. The AVMA has specifically targeted the Tennessee Walking Horse industry while actively seeking to exclude other breeds for years.

In a July 23, 2015 letter, the AVMA encouraged the USDA to limit the ban of padded horse shows and actions devices to only the Tennessee Walking, Racking and Spotted Saddle Horse – not all breeds of equines. See

Later, when the USDA published it’s proposed rule, it included a ban on padded shoes and action devices specific to Tennessee Walking Horse, Racking Horse, Spotted Saddle Horse and “related breeds” – not all breeds of equines.

On September 8, 2016, the AVMA published “Since we issued our call to support the USDA’s proposed changes to the Horse Protection Act, we’ve been receiving some comments from our membership and others concerned about a specific phrase within the proposed rule. According to the rumors going around, people fear that the proposed changes will prohibit specific actions, practices, devices and substances (such as pads) used when training and showing breeds such as Morgans, Saddlebreds, and Arabians…’” See

In response to the outcry of concern from other showing breeds such as Morgans, Saddlebreds and Arabians, who often wear padded horse shoes and train with action devices, the AVMA followed up again with the USDA by letter dated October 26, 2016, “However, it is equally important that any new regulations be focused on addressing the problem of soring and specifically the Tennessee Walking Horse, Racking Horse, and Spotted Saddle Horse breeds, which have a long history of soring abuse and violations. Soring is a problem that is recognized in a specific segment of the horse industry. The AVMA and AAEP do not believe that this regulation will prohibit or intends to prohibit the use of supportive pads or shoeing practices in breeds or disciplines outside the Tennessee Walking Horse, Racking Horse, or Spotted Saddle Horse breeds, as they do not result in, nor are they purposely used as part of, efforts to sore horses. However, we would encourage the USDA to provide further clarification for the horse industry regarding the use of pads, hoof bands, and foreign substances to quell fears that the proposed changes will prohibit practices that do not have a reasonable expectation to cause soring.” See

It is illogical that the AVMA can support the ban of equipment on three breeds, (one of which does not use the equipment at all) while going to great lengths to ensure that all other breeds are free to continue to use the exact same equipment, especially consider no other breeds are routinely inspected by the USDA even though the Horse Protection Act applies to all breeds.

The AVMA is supporting and furthering animal rights groups. Their website is full of ASPCA and HSUS articles. One part of the AVMA’s website was even created with the “assistance of the ASPCA”.

ASPCA, just like HSUS, is not your local SPCA or Humane Society. The ASPCA, just like HSUS, settled a federal racketeering lawsuit involving Feld Entertainment (Ringling Brothers Circus) after the judge ruled that ASPCA and others paid the key witnesses who had lied under oath.

The CEO of ASPCA, according to IRS records, earned $852,231.00 in 2017, while CEO of HSUS earned $425,582.00 during this same period. For 2017, ASPCA reported net assets of $273,912,568.00, while HSUS reported $249,138,831.00. (

The AVMA does not actively market for contributions from private citizens, yet, it is the AVMA who has contributed $68,750.00 to Schrader and $42,500.00 to Yoho. The AVMA is doing the bidding of ASPCA and HSUS. The AVMA is seen as a reputable leading veterinarian organization, but it is impossible to stay reputable when consorting with ASPCA, HSUS and PETA.

Congressman Schrader has gone from a score of 58 by HSUS up to a recent 100, while Yoho had a slower start with a score of 33, but is gaining ground at 50. It could be that the large contributions from the beef industry or Thoroughbred industry is holding Yoho back from a perfect 100 score.

You cannot take an oath to science and ignore it so easily. The science does not back the Tydings’ Past Act. See