This November, Coloradans will vote on a ballot measure stakeholders say could alter the future of veterinary medicine.

Proposition 129, the Veterinary Professional Associate Initiative, has sparked intense debate among veterinarians and animal welfare organizations around the state.

The measure aims to create a veterinary professional associate role and allow VPAs to practice medicine under the supervision of a licensed veterinarian. While supporters argue the measure could mitigate the veterinary shortage facing Colorado, opponents say the quality of veterinary care and animal safety could be at risk.

In a survey conducted by the Colorado State University Animal-Human Policy Center, veterinary professionals around the state expressed their struggles with the current veterinary system.

Seventy-one percent of practice managers and owners reported they are forced to turn away clients weekly because they are not able to fit them into their schedules or address concerns in a timely manner.

The Dumb Friends League, a leading supporter of Proposition 129 and endorser of the All Pets Deserve Vet Care coalition, consistently faces this issue at its subsidized veterinary hospital on the CSU Spur campus.

“Every day, we have a line going into the parking lot,” said Ali Mickelson, senior director of advocacy and education at the Dumb Friends League. “We serve people on a first-come, first-served basis, and we fill up in a half hour every single day for a community veterinary medicine hospital. We’re also seeing an increasing number of people surrendering pets just because they can’t find veterinary care, so that’s been really hard.”

The organization states that introducing VPAs to the veterinary workforce would not only provide options to increase veterinary resources but also reduce the costs of care.

“We just think it’s an opportunity to add more people who care for animals into the profession,” Mickelson said. “As a shelter, we’re acutely aware of the shortage, and we would be delighted to hire these folks today because they would allow us to expand the number of clients that we can see and have another level of increased care within our facilities.”

VPAs would have the ability to diagnose medical conditions, order and perform tests and perform routine surgical procedures. Critics argue that allowing someone with less training than a licensed veterinarian to provide such services would lower the standard of veterinary care and put pets at risk.

“The disparity is shocking,” reads a statement from Dr. Will French, former president of the Colorado Veterinary Medical Association, and Kylie Yancey, DVM candidate at CSU. “Proposition 129 would allow VPAs to take on critical duties reserved for licensed veterinarians, putting them in real-life medical situations that they are not trained for and, as a result, placing pet patients in unnecessary danger.”

Organizations including the American Veterinary Medical Association and the Student American Veterinary Medical Association have come out firmly against the measure as well.

“Given the considerable risks the proposed veterinary professional associate in Colorado would pose to animals, public health and our food supply, the SAVMA Executive Board has taken a position in full support of the AVMA’s position opposing Proposition 129 and the creation of the mid-level practitioner,” SAVMA President Tara Fellows Barron said.

Currently, the CSU College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences is creating a program that will train VPAs and provide them with a master’s degree in an effort to address the shortage of care in shelters. Per Colorado law, graduates of the program will not be allowed to work in veterinary clinics but could work in spaces including animal shelters and rescues unless Proposition 129 passes.

While CSU cannot take a stance on the legislation, the university has released a statement addressing its plan to launch the program.

“It’s important to remember that CSU’s program plans started long before the ballot measure was in existence, and CSU will continue to develop this master’s program regardless of the outcome of the election,” the statement reads.

As the debate continues, some veterinarians express optimism about VPAs and CSU’s program. One of them is Dr. Paige Garnett, founder of Care Animal Hospital.

“I see this idea as my right arm — I would use these people,” Garnett said. “There’s nothing that says these people will deliver substandard care — nothing. The preparation is solid, and I think CSU has their act together and their heads straight on this.”

Veterinarians who oppose the measure simultaneously support CSU’s program as well.

“I just don’t think the solution to (the cost of veterinary care) is this particular measure,” said Dr. Joya Migliaccio, associate veterinarian at Family and Friends Veterinary Care. “I do think that this would help immensely in our shelter situation. … If we can provide them with some relief and some ability to have other people who are helping take some of their work burden off, I think that would be absolutely instrumental.”

Reach Laila Shekarchian at news@collegian.com or on Instagram @CSUCollegian.

K9cc không những nổi bật trong nền lĩnh vực thể thao trực tuyến, mà còn khắc ghi dấu ấn với các dịch vụ casino và trò chơi giải trí. Với cam kết mang đến chất lượng và dịch vụ, sảnh cược này đã rất nhanh chóng chiếm được lòng tin của anh em bet thủ. Hãy cùng 789club tìm hiểu những điểm mạnh mà nhà cái đã mang đến cho người tham gia.

Lý do vì sao nhà cái K9cc là sự lựa chọn hàng đầu

Để có thể hiểu hơn viết vì sao nhà cái này trở thành địa điểm hàng đầu của người sử dụng. Hãy cùng khám phá những lý do tạo nên điểm khác biệt của K9 CC từ 789club nhé.

Nổi bật trong thiết kế ngành cá cược

K9cc đã rất nổi bật nhờ vào việc ứng dụng vào nền công nghệ tiên tiến, cũng như sáng tạo về chất lượng dịch vụ. Từ nền tảng cá cược trực tuyến hiện đại, cho đến cách tính năng độc quyền. Nhà cái đã có thể đáp ứng được mọi nhu cầu của người tham gia và mang đến trải nghiệm cá cược chất lượng nhất.

Cam kết đảm bảo được quyền lợi cho người tham gia

K9cc cam kết có thể cung cấp cho người tham gia một môi trường cho cá cược vô cùng an toàn, bằng những biện pháp bảo mật tiên tiến nhất. Đảm bảo được sự công bằng trong tất cả các trò chơi, người tham gia có thể hoàn toàn yên tâm hơn khi lựa chọn cá cược vào.

Khám phá thêm những tính năng độc quyền có tại nhà cái

K9cc nổi bật với nhiều tính năng cá cược vô cùng tiên tiến, bao gồm trực tiếp cho đến thời gian thực. Các công cụ nhằm phân tích chi tiết có thể giúp cho người chơi đưa ra cho mình quyết định một cách thông minh hơn. Những tính năng này, không những làm nên sự phong phú cho trải nghiệm, mà còn có thể tăng cường thêm khả năng dự đoán được kết quả chính xác nhất.

Ngay tại đây các anh em cược thủ có thể khám phá được một thế giới trò chơi đa dạng như casino và các bộ môn thể thao hấp dẫn. Cùng với đó là sự lựa chọn phong phú từ game bài cho đến các thể loại khác. K9cc đảm bảo có thể đáp ứng được mọi sở thích và nhu cầu tham gia của người chơi.

Các chương trình ưu đãi dành tặng riêng cho người tham gia

Ngay dưới đây là một số những ưu đãi vô cùng hấp dẫn mà nhà cái thường xuyên cung cấp dành cho người tham gia vào: 

Người tham gia khi mới đăng ký vào tài khoản lần đầu tiên tại nhà cái K9cc sẽ được nhận ngay tiền thưởng dựa trên số tiền nạp lần đầu tiên. Mức tiền thưởng tối đa lên đến 3 triệu đồng.

Ngoài ra nhà cái còn thường xuyên cung cấp thêm rất nhiều chương trình hoàn tiền cược lên đến 5% tổng số tiền cược thua trong hằng tuần.

Lời kết

Với nhiều các chương trình ưu đãi hấp dẫn cùng với chất lượng dịch vụ chăm sóc khách hàng tận tình và chuyên nghiệp. K9cc cam kết có thể mang đến cho người tham gia có được trải nghiệm tuyệt vời nhất. Hãy theo dõi 789club ngay hôm nay để biết cụ thể hơn về nhà cái uy tín nhé.

• Xem thêm: 8kbet – Nhà Cái Cá Cược Hấp Dẫn Nhất Trong Năm 2024

If Sen. Mike Lee saw a genie that allowed him to pass any bill he wanted, he would pass the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act “a thousand times out of a thousand times.” 

That’s what Lee told an audience at the Sutherland Institute’s Congressional Series at the University of Utah’s Hinckley Institute of Politics. His panel was the sixth and final of this year’s series. 

The executive branch’s consolidation of power, through federal agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), was one of Lee’s enduring concerns discussed at the public forum on Monday. He touted the REINS Act as one way to tame executive power.

“The reason I would choose that one is that it would effectively restore the primacy of Congress as the lawmaking branch,” he said.

The REINS Act

The REINS Act is a proposed bill that would give Congress the final say on new rules passed by government agencies. However, the bill is limited to new rules that affect the economy by an estimated $100 million annually, cause major price increases to consumers or have “significant adverse effects” on U.S. businesses competing with foreign-based.

But, the REINS Act has received pushback from progressive groups and labor unions. 

The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), a federation of labor unions representing 12.5 million workers in the U.S., sent a letter to Congress in 2023 opposing the bill.

“Under the REINS Act, politics, not scientific judgment or expertise, would dictate all regulatory actions. Corporate opposition and influence would swap the public’s interest and block needed protections,” wrote William Samuel, AFL-CIO’s chief lobbyist.

However, Lee contends that giving Congress a more significant say in rule-making will retain expertise.

“That’s part of the beauty of the REINS Act. The REINS act allows us to preserve [expertise], but it gives Congress the obligation, the duty to have the final say because Congress needs to be on the line,” he said.

Still, Lee thinks Congress’ ability to write and pass laws makes it the most dangerous branch of government. However, he said it’s “especially dangerous to hand over [rule-making] from the most accountable branch in government and the most dangerous … to a portion of the executive branch run by unelected, unaccountable, nameless, faceless bureaucrats.”

The Chevron Doctrine

During the panel, Lee also praised the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Chevron doctrine in June. However, he called it a “relatively minor change.” He said more needs to be done to usurp power from the executive branch.

The Chevron doctrine was a judicial framework that said courts should defer to a federal agency’s reasonable interpretation of a statute when that statute seems ambiguous. The 1984 decision that created it cited an agency’s technical expertise as one reason to follow this framework.

Federal courts have cited the Chevron doctrine 18,000 times. According to the Congressional Research Service, it is “unquestionably one of the foundational decisions in administrative law. “

g.radtke@dailyutahchronicle.com

@GiovanniRadtke

The post How Mike Lee Wants To Take Power Away from Federal Agencies first appeared on The Daily Utah Chronicle.

Editor’s Note: A source in this story has been granted anonymity for reasons of personal safety and the ability to travel to Palestine.

The University of Minnesota administration has verbally committed to sponsoring tuition for three Gazan students for the spring 2025 semester, according to an Instagram post by the UMN Divest Coalition on Oct. 7.

The UMN Divest Coalition said Provosts Harvey Charles and Raj Singh are fully committed to covering the cost of full tuition, but students will have to apply for separate grants and scholarships to cover their travel costs, living expenses, and room and board.

The decision came on the anniversary of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack against Israel where the Israeli government estimated 1,200 people were killed and more than 200 hostages were taken. Since Oct. 7, Israeli defense forces have killed more than 42,000 Palestinians in its war in Gaza, leaving hundreds of thousands of Palestinians homeless and injured.

University spokesperson Jake Ricker said the University already has an existing program administered through the Office of International Student and Scholar Services.

Originally created by the University’s Board of Regents as early as 1941, the program provides financial aid support in the form of a tuition waiver to international students experiencing significant hardships, according to Ricker.

“This program has offered resources to students from many countries affected by conflict in the past,” Ricker said. “Like all international students, those who qualify for this program must also apply and be accepted academically to the U of M and apply for a student visa from the U.S. government.”

The three prospective international students have applied to the University and can receive support through the program if they are eligible for admission, according to Ricker.

Students for Justice in Palestine’s (SJP) Vice President of Media said the UMN Divest Coalition originally asked for 14 students to be sponsored, including full tuition and board. He said he was disappointed but excited with the progress being made.

“This is our first kind of hope for the future in the University of Minnesota sponsoring dozens of students and supporting the Palestinian students on their campus,” he said.

In a Faculty Consultative Committee (FCC) meeting on Oct. 19, 2023, Provost Rachel Croson allowed Israeli students planning to serve in the Israeli military to take a leave of absence and receive reimbursement for tuition, which pro-Palestinian organizations were unaware of until recently, according to the SJP Vice President of Media.

According to FCC meeting minutes written by Amber Bathke, “Students who want to return home to the affected region to serve in the military will be able to receive a tuition refund, and students who are struggling to focus on their academic work can reach out for flexibility in changing to S/N grading or dropping classes late.”

The SJP Vice President of Media said he was frustrated by this decision.

“It’s quite shocking to see that they’re able to so easily fund these students,” he said. “So we ask for at least a matching of the amount of students that went and fought for the IDF or more than what was already implemented.”

The UMN Divest Coalition groups, which includes Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and SJP, continued protests the week of Oct. 7 and on the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attacks. SJP called its week of action in an Oct. 3 Instagram post.

On Oct. 7, a group of around 20 student protesters gathered outside of Minnesota Hillel, a center for Jewish students at the University to commemorate Oct. 7.

The UMN Divest Coalition planned a  “One Year of Genocide” walkout and protested in front of Coffman Union, protesting for six hours on Oct. 7.

The SJP Vice President of Media said the UMN Divest Coalition will keep fighting for the University to admit and sponsor more Gazan students.

“We’re gonna keep pushing for more and more students to at least try and counteract the complete destruction of the four main universities in Gaza,” he said.

Before the Saturday afternoon kickoff, the Boston University men’s soccer team sat sixth in the Patriot League and hosted a Bucknell University squad tied for first. The Terriers’ 1-0 win over the Bison aligned with the polls and handed Bucknell its first Patriot League loss of the season.

The post Head to Head: Abolishing Fraternities first appeared on The Daily Utah Chronicle.

The Students for Human Life’s semesterly chalking of pro-life messages and drawings around Northrop Mall predictably led to the semesterly defacing of the same. 

The messages were entirely positive: simple statements of Christian charity and support for mothers and their children. Yet abortion supporters on campus could not countenance declarations of an unborn child’s humanity or messages that pro-lifers care for both mother and child. They had to erase and cover these drawings, often replaced with blasphemies, in acts of blatant anti-Christian bigotry. 

Those who preach so much about diversity & inclusion seem to have no interest in intellectual diversity and no problem with excluding students with whom they disagree politically and morally.

Liberal academics drastically outnumber their conservative colleagues. According to a study, the faculties of the top 40 universities in the U.S. that are registered Democrats outnumbered registered Republicans. It therefore follows that there would be more supporters of abortion than pro-lifers at a public university. 

Pro-abortion students naturally would disagree with the statement that unborn babies deserve basic rights. The vitriol with which they responded to it bespeaks a more troubling mindset. Regardless of the side of this issue on which one comes down, it should be universally agreed that “Love Life” is not a hateful statement. Nor should “Jesus Loves You” be viewed as religious extremism that must be turned into blasphemy. 

The point of attending university is to broaden one’s intellectual horizons — to encounter unfamiliar ideas, including ideas with which one may disagree. There is absolutely no need and absolutely no excuse for adults to express the level of anger they did toward these messages. The longtime message of liberal academics has been one of support for radical tolerance and academic freedom. Recent events have proven these phrases to be hollow. By their actions, liberal students have shown that Christians deserve no tolerance and conservative opinions are not covered by academic freedom.

By contrast, Students for Human Life hosts a tabling event every semester to engage pro-abortion students in respectful dialogue. Open discussion and rationalization of opinions are the goals of these events. Yet, pro-abortion students seldom engage the group, choosing either avoidance or passing mockery. 

Perhaps if these students engaged in discussions with pro-lifers, they would come to understand that “Love Life” and “Jesus Loves You” are not meant to cause offense but are instead genuine expressions of care and support.

In university, a student is theoretically enrolled to learn new ideas and information, as well as how to develop rational responses to these new ideas. The answer to opinions with which one disagrees cannot be vandalism — the answer must be better arguments. 

Pro-abortion students should consider this the next time Students for Human Life has their chalking event or a discussion table.

Zachary Borneke is a third-year student at the University of Minnesota majoring in Political Science with a minor in History.

In addition to electing officials and confirming judicial appointments, Colorado voters are given the opportunity to decide the fates of proposed amendments to the Constitution of the State of Colorado.

A state constitution outlines a state’s governance. This includes powers, structure, limitations of the state government and individual and civil rights. The Colorado Constitution was adopted in 1876, currently containing 29 articles. It has been amended 171 times. 

In this election, Amendment G, Amendment H, Amendment I, Amendment J, Amendment K, Amendment 79 and Amendment 80 are being voted on for various modifications.

Every amendment, except for Amendment J, will require 55% approval from voters because they add language to the Colorado Constitution, while Amendment J removes language.

Amendment G

Currently, the property tax exemption is limited to veterans with a service-related disability rated at 100%. If the modifications are approved, Amendment G would open the property tax exemption to veterans with an individual unemployability status as determined by the U.S Department of Veteran Affairs.

Amendment H

Amendment H would create a board called the Independent Judicial Discipline Adjudicative Board and create rules for the judicial discipline process. This board would have 12 members with four district court judges, four attorneys and four citizens. They would conduct disciplinary hearings and hear appeals of informal remedial sanctions given by the Commission on Judicial Discipline. The amendment would also clarify when discipline proceedings become public.

Amendment I

Currently, suspects of first-degree murder cannot be denied bail. If voted into effect, Amendment I would deem first degree murder suspects ineligible for bail as long as prosecutors can show they have a strong case. If voted no, first degree murder suspects will not be able to be denied bail.

Amendment J

In 2015, same-sex marriage was legalized across the United States. However, Colorado’s constitution still contains language that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. The constitution states, “Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.” Voting yea on Amendment J is voting to remove this language, while a nay vote is for keeping it. The amendment will only require majority approval because it is removing language from the state constitution.

Amendment K

Amendment K would alter deadlines for filing initiatives, referendum petition signatures, the text and title of every measure published and require judicial officials to file their declarations of intent to run one week earlier in order to allow the Secretary of State’s Office to certify the content and order of the ballot.

Amendment 79

Amendment 79, the Right to Abortion and Health Insurance Coverage Initiative, would ensure that state and local governments cannot take away the right to abortion and allows the procedure to be covered under health insurance plans. If voted “yes,” it would repeal Section 50 of Article V of the Colorado Constitution, adopted in 1984, that prohibits public funds being used for abortions. If voted “no,” public funds will continue to be banned from being used for abortion procedures.

Amendment 80

Amendment 80 would add a new section to Article IX of the Colorado Constitution. It would state “all children have the right to equal opportunity and access to a quality education” and “parents have the right to direct the education of their children.”

This would include neighborhood, charter and private schools, homeschools, open enrollment options and future innovations in education. If voted “yes,” the clause reaffirming school choice rights would be added to the Colorado Constitution.

Reach Janaya Stafford at news@collegian.com or on Twitter @CSUCollegian.