Updated Thoughts on Colorado VPA Ballot Measure

I unpublished and updated this post about the VPA ballot measure in Colorado after reading additional input from the veterinary world and seeing DVMs on Twitter, in particular, calling BS on the ballot measure's purported goals. So, here we go again. Jump down to the section called Other Reasons to Oppose It to catch up, if you read the earlier version!

Well, Drat. Maybe Shame on Me?

Typically, I'm crabby about the people who stand outside grocery stores and use high-pressure tactics to collect signatures for each year's election ballots. I feel skeptical about how they explain the ballot initiatives. I doubt the name of the organization represents what it sounds like it represents. And, often, I vote NO on various ballot measures because I don't understand or trust the real motives. I did, however, recently sign one for 2024 Colorado Ballot Initiative 145 because it offers a possible solution to a few problems in modern veterinary medicine. I signed it even though the dude collecting signatures said something I believe to be 100% false. Gold star to me for not correcting him. It was hot, my recovering fractured ankle (aka FRANKLE) hurt, and he pushed to get me to sign ALL of the ballot initiatives on his clipboard. Here's why. 

Scroll all the way down to find out what the dude said that made me roll my eyes.

Now that I've read and thought about the situation more, I feel not great that I signed the petition. It probably would have gotten enough signatures either way, but still ... I should have trusted my gut with the idea that these kinds of things are ALMOST NEVER what they claim to be and claim to do.  

VPA Basics

I've written before in more detail about the basics about what a VPA (veterinary professional associate) is. The short version is that it would be a new kind of educational pathway and veterinary career option that sits somewhere between credentialed veterinary technician (CVT, RVT, LVT, etc.) and a veterinarian. Kind of like a physician's assistant or nurse practitioner in human medicine. 

Who Wants VPA(s) Approved in Colorado?

From what I've seen in local Colorado media, the proponents of Ballot Initiative 145 include one of the biggest animal shelters in the state and another group called the Vet Care Coalition. In addition, Colorado State University is poised to build out and get accreditation for a master's degree for VPA(s). Here's how the text of the actual initiative starts > 

P.S. I also loathe that ballot initiatives get published in ALL CAPS. It makes it almost impossible to read (and understand), and I always feel like that's the point ... like they're actually sneaking something in there and making it hard to find. 

What Problems May VPA(s) Address in Veterinary Care?

I'm really boiling things down here, but essentially the goals of an effort to create a VPA role for veterinary professionals include the following:

1. Increasing access to veterinary care, especially in underserved areas and for those facing systemic barriers
2. Potentially lowering costs for routine veterinary care (ask me sometime about that recent $130 routine urinalysis)
3. Giving people interested in veterinary careers or those seeking a new pathway another option

So, Who Opposes the VPA Initiative in Colorado?

Maybe not surprisingly the Colorado Veterinary Medical Association opposes Colorado Ballot Initiative 145. <<< Their position statement outlines several barriers that make creating a VPN education and licensing system difficult. 

Other Reasons to Oppose It

Additional reading made me want to update this post.

You probably saw this recent op-ed by Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren about how private equity firms are "coming for" your pets and about how / why that's contributing to rising costs of veterinary care. Hint: Corporate profits. 

A friend also shared this Substack by Eric Fish, DVM, PhD, called Is VetMed Ready for a 'Midlevel Practitioner"? It goes through the VPA ballot measure and the new degree program required in detail. 

The part that jumped out at me says, "This is setting aside whether or not the practice actually will charge less for VPA visits. My experiences in the veterinary industry suggest they will likely keep the prices the same and simply let the difference boost their bottomline."

Folks on #VetTwitter said the same thing ... basically that veterinary clients who *think this ballot measure creating VPA roles *will lower their veterinary costs will likely be disappointed by what really happens. These private equity (mostly dudes) WILL lower THEIR costs, not yours, so that they can make even more money off of pet care. 

Dr. Fish also explains the current salary situation in vet med like this: "Veterinarians currently earn less than the median salary for a PA in human medicine at $119,000/year, and far less than physicians, while veterinary technicians earn about $44,000 ... Presumably, a VPA would earn somewhere between these two ranges, and if you averaged those it would come out to $81,500. This seems likely to both put a ceiling on already underpaid veterinary technician earnings while potentially being a drag on DVM salaries."

In other words, it could potentially and financially screw over people *already working in the veterinary profession. Like they don't have enough going on already!

People in the veterinary profession suggest we simply allow veterinary technicians to work to their full potential (and get paid for it), rather than adding a new layer of provider in the middle. 

I also read this AVMA Q&A with a Colorado legislator who is also a veterinarian. When asked about the ballot measure and creation of a VPA role helping with the veterinary shortage, Dr. Karen McCormick says, "The veterinary shortage is a talking point behind this push. I think what really is behind the push is big corporate money trying to find innovative ways to grow the bottom line. The only group the VPA would benefit are large corporations trying to find ways to see more patients, get customers, and somehow lower their cost of doing business.

I don’t see it as a benefit to anybody else. I don’t see it helping a veterinary shortage at all. It’s a barrier between the veterinarian and patients because one veterinarian supervising two to four people puts the veterinarian farther from the patients and dilutes the accuracy of the treatment. It doesn’t cause clients to spend any less money, and they might not get an accurate diagnosis and medication right off the bat."

Will Colorado's VPA Ballot Initiative 145 Pass?

I predict it will, but I now hope it won't. Stay tuned. And, if it happens here in Colorado, then you might see VPA jobs near you in the future, but probably not for a while because it will take time to create, accredit, graduate, and license the first class of VPA students.

That said, now that I know more, I will encourage my friends in Colorado to vote AGAINST the VPA ballot measure.

And, finally ... what did the clipboard dude say?

When trying to explain the VPA ballot initiative to me, he claimed that VPA roles already exist in other states. With close to 30 years working as a professional journalist in the pet / veterinary space, I do not believe that's true. I think he is completely full of beans as we say around my house, but I was hot and tired and sore, and I just wanted to go home ... so I didn't Rox-splain to him the reality.