I can see both sides of this discussion.  My concerns are:

--What qualifies a "trained" lay person to properly insert and secure an IV catheter with appropriate sterile technique?  May be good to at least have some sort of certification, even if short course.  Some DVM's and LVT's are good at teaching, some not.  I am also concerned about what comes next that we will be okay with handing over to lay staff.

--Many rural or low income practices cannot find an LVT willing to come work for them due to location and there is not the practice income to properly pay an LVT.  And clients may not be able/willing to pay for higher level of care with liscensed staff.  Working to educate clients can take time and a lot of effort (which is well worth it  for the animals, but can be a gradual process).

--I value my LVTs, and we have been trying to hire more LVTs for 3+ years (where are they?), so we see the shortage side of the equation.  Fortunately we have been able to recruit several LVT students to work with us and have a couple of assistants we are trying to encourage to start in a program.  We also have worked to improve pay of our LVTs along with competative benefits. 

--I like the idea of a time limit/ sunset clause if this proposal passes.  Those lay staff that are trained for IV catheters could hopefully enroll in an LVT program so they could continue to learn and advance.