Daily Archives: November 20, 2012
Portland Pet Lovers Balk at ObamaCare for Dogs

The man who built up the managed care vet clinics known as Banfield Pet Hospitals to 600 outlets in the US and UK , has now begun what can only be called a renta-pet program.
The Hannah business plan is a combo of ideas already out there: car leasing, E-Harmony and ObamaCare for your pet.
An agreed upon monthly rental fee includes food (shipped to your home) and veterinary care. And it’s that last part that is what Willamette Week sought to highlight (that, and the fact that the vet who came up with the idea is really, really rich [hint: that’s bad]).
The new Hannah concept moves beyond managed care and goes full single payer–exactly where President Obama has expressed he would like to take US health care. It even comes with its own IPAB Board:
According to the Hannah contract, “Hannah’s Medical Standards Board, in consultation with the Pet Parent, is the final determiner of any support, care or ‘end of life treatments.
That’s right, they’re Sarah Palin‘s death panels for dogs.
How are lefty Portlanders dealing with this? Let’s check in with some of the folks Willamette Week talked to:
Rose, a Portlander who asked that her last name not be used, says she and her boyfriend got a purebred Yorkshire terrier puppy from Hannah in June and were attracted by its affordability—$60 a month for the dog, food and vet care. A Yorkie can cost $600, she says.Months later, Rose says she’s having second thoughts, in part because she realizes she would not be allowed to decide what treatments her dog received if it became ill. It would be up to a Hannah vet, not her, what care her dog gets.“They decide if they want to fix it or not,” she says. “It could be: ‘Oh, she has a tumor, we’re just going to put her down.’”Campbell says if a vet can reasonably treat a pet, Hannah will do it.“We’ll recommend what we believe is best,” he says.If a pet parent wants to opt for other treatment, the parent can get veterinary care elsewhere, Campbell says. Or she can buy out her contract.
And this one:
[Laura] McNamara signed a certificate of ownership that stipulates, “I hereby transfer/sell full ownership of this pet unconditionally to The Hannah Society.” She also handed over $95 per dog to sign up.When she brought in Alvin for his physical six days later, however, the doctor told her the dog’s health posed too big a risk. He quoted her $300 a month, or more, for the one animal.McNamara left.
“The whole thing was creepy and weird,” McNamara says.
Tri Met Code Cheats? Is This for Real?
Portland Pet Lovers Balk at ObamaCare for Dogs

The man who built up the managed care vet clinics known as Banfield Pet Hospitals to 600 outlets in the US and UK , has now begun what can only be called a renta-pet program.
The Hannah business plan is a combo of ideas already out there: car leasing, E-Harmony and ObamaCare for your pet.
An agreed upon monthly rental fee includes food (shipped to your home) and veterinary care. And it’s that last part that is what Willamette Week sought to highlight (that, and the fact that the vet who came up with the idea is really, really rich [hint: that’s bad]).
The new Hannah concept moves beyond managed care and goes full single payer–exactly where President Obama has expressed he would like to take US health care. It even comes with its own IPAB Board:
According to the Hannah contract, “Hannah’s Medical Standards Board, in consultation with the Pet Parent, is the final determiner of any support, care or ‘end of life treatments.
That’s right, they’re Sarah Palin‘s death panels for dogs.
How are lefty Portlanders dealing with this? Let’s check in with some of the folks Willamette Week talked to:
Rose, a Portlander who asked that her last name not be used, says she and her boyfriend got a purebred Yorkshire terrier puppy from Hannah in June and were attracted by its affordability—$60 a month for the dog, food and vet care. A Yorkie can cost $600, she says.Months later, Rose says she’s having second thoughts, in part because she realizes she would not be allowed to decide what treatments her dog received if it became ill. It would be up to a Hannah vet, not her, what care her dog gets.“They decide if they want to fix it or not,” she says. “It could be: ‘Oh, she has a tumor, we’re just going to put her down.’”Campbell says if a vet can reasonably treat a pet, Hannah will do it.“We’ll recommend what we believe is best,” he says.If a pet parent wants to opt for other treatment, the parent can get veterinary care elsewhere, Campbell says. Or she can buy out her contract.
And this one:
[Laura] McNamara signed a certificate of ownership that stipulates, “I hereby transfer/sell full ownership of this pet unconditionally to The Hannah Society.” She also handed over $95 per dog to sign up.When she brought in Alvin for his physical six days later, however, the doctor told her the dog’s health posed too big a risk. He quoted her $300 a month, or more, for the one animal.McNamara left.
“The whole thing was creepy and weird,” McNamara says.
Mic Check! Occupy Portland Continues the Official Fizzle
That’s what it looks like from this message by the Occupiers. It wouldn’t be the weather that has prompted the #OPDX crowd to move from the wide open spaces of Terry Schrunk Plaza to the smallish cafeteria of St. Francis Church would it?
After all the Occupiers spent part of October and November camping out last year.
The 99% is looking a little smaller these days.
Fact Checking the Fact Checkers: You’re Wrong on the Libya Quotes
Remarks by the President on the Deaths of U.S. Embassy Staff in Libya
10:48 A.M. EDT
rees mojave
Memories of Another Tree Lighting Ceremony
CRC tax
The recent defeat of a transportation sales tax in Clark County was characterized by some officials as proof folks in Vancouver oppose light rail. But the characterization was an ill-informed screed by 10 southwest Washington Republicans protesting the design and financing of a new bridge linking Portland and Vancouver and the light-rail line built into it.
The failed tax had nothing to do with building light rail. It was put to Clark County voters against the wishes of those advocating the Columbia River Crossing, among them the Greater Vancouver Chamber of Commerce, to raise about $4.5 million. Slightly more than $3 million of the revenue would have gone to operating and maintaining an $850 million light-rail line the U.S. government intends to build in partnership with Oregon and Washington. The feds simply need evidence that somebody along the way will pay to run the line.
But that didn’t stop Washington state Sen. Don Benton of Vancouver from reading smoke signals in the vote and being angry with those who disputed the analysis. He told The Oregonian’s Richard Read: “This whole (CRC) thing has been a master scam perpetrated on the citizens of Washington by Metro in order to bring light rail into Vancouver.” Meanwhile, southwest Washington’s Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler, who otherwise argues a new bridge is necessary, cited the vote in declaring the $3.5 billion project will fail if light rail is pushed upon a community that doesn’t want it.
The claims are phobic and without evidence. After weighing several project alternatives, the Vancouver City Council four years ago endorsed the CRC as configured. And there have been no substantive, Vancouver-based light-rail protests in several years of CRC public sessions and hearings to remedy one of the region’s key economic and quality-of-life challenges: replacing an I-5 bridge whose slowdowns and danger constrict the flow of freight and commuters.
To get the CRC launched after $160 million in planning and design work, the legislatures of Oregon and Washington must in 2013 commit to their doable shares of the funding, at $900 million to be financed over decades. Only then can the Northwest congressional delegation make its case for the release of federal transportation money, likely unavailable or harder to win in subsequent years owing to the nation’s fiscal challenges. The U.S. Department of Transportation, meanwhile, has declared the CRC to be a project of national significance, high up the priority list. Starting a full-on redesign could set things back for years.
An action now to stall the CRC’s momentum would thwart job growth. The I-5 bridge is at the center of a transportation and trading system supporting one in five jobs in Oregon. Freight industries using the bridge support roughly 130,000 jobs at warehouses and distribution centers near the ports of Portland and Vancouver. This is to say nothing of the estimated 1,900 new construction-related jobs that would be sustained over an eight-year period to build the CRC — or the spending that all those new paychecks would allow in both Vancouver and Portland.
Key things still need working out. The U.S. Coast Guard must approve revisions in the bridge design to provide more clearance for river traffic below. At a hearing Wednesday in Vancouver, however, the Coast Guard for the first time reportedly acknowledged that clearance for each and every industry affected might not be feasible — but that the CRC would need to show it had taken every measure possible to accommodate them.
With so much at stake, it’s no time for shoot-from-the-hip blasts. Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt, long involved in CRC deliberations, told The Oregonian’s editorial board the claims that Vancouver folks fear light rail derive from “a minority of individuals in our community who really aren’t concerned about economic growth, jobs for our citizens, (or) effective and efficient mobility for cars and transit. …” He allowed he’d recently had “disturbing conversations, fueled by some of the electeds, about ‘those people’ coming to Vancouver on light rail.”
Funny, we would be those people. So, too, would many Clark County residents who commute to and from their jobs in Portland.
It’s time to move ahead. Fear-mongering and deliberate confusions have no place in a project so complex and vital as a new I-5 bridge, even one that connects Vancouver with more than 50 miles of light rail lacing Portland.
UPDATED! Milwaukie Elks Club Saved From Smart Growthers
As one Clackastani Rebel put it, “Elections have consequences.”
Plans to raze the venerable Milwaukie Elks Club and replace it with section 8 housing to accommodate its proximity to future (unwanted) light rail has been deep sixed.
“…County Administrator Steve Wheeler realized a majority of the five board members did not support the project moving forward, county spokesman Tim Heider said.
“The support for it had just evaporated,” Heider said. “It was clear from Steve’s conversations with individual commissioners that there was no support for it.”
And then the Oregonian reported:
John Ludlow, the incoming chairman who beat current Chairwoman Charlotte Lehan in the Nov. 6 election, e-mailed county commissioners and Wheeler this morning requesting they delay any decisions on the option agreement for the Elks site.
“It is my intention, once I am chair, to initiate a termination of the purchase,” Ludlow wrote. “I am confident I will have a board majority to support the decision.”
The nonpartisan board will switch to a 3-2 Republican advantage next year with many expecting policy shifts from the current board, where Democrats enjoy a 4-1 advantage.
Here’s the letter newly elected Chair John Ludlow sent out to County officials:
The Clackamas County Board of CommissionersDear Commissioners,In the spirit of cooperation with the upcoming board membership changes, I request that you avoid making any decisions regarding the option to purchase the Elks property.It is now well known that the membership is overwhelmingly opposed to the sale of their facility and a preservation effort has been underway.It is my intention, once I am chair, to initiate a termination of the purchase. I am confident I will have a board majority to support this decision.I am additionally concerned that board action towards this purchase, which in part involves the stated purpose of assisting TriMet’s Light Rail parking structure access and egress, may require a county wide public vote under the recently passed measure 3-401.I thank you for you understanding.JohnJohn LudlowClackamas County Commission Chair-Elect503-682-3419