Sure wish they make Pluto a planet again
Then we must make at least Eris a planet, too, and probably Haumea, Makemake, Ceres, 2007-OR-10, Sedna, and Quaoar as well. Plus the 10,000 or so other similar bodies that we haven't found yet but probably are there.
Mind you, I am not against labeling them all planets. The current definition is a bit artificial and smacks of tendentiousness. It'd be more logical to just use a simpler definition and drop the orbit clearing rule. Our solar system would then have "as many planets as it happens to have" and if that number turns out to be huge then it turns out to be huge and that's it. After all, we are supposed to make our theory first and then check it against reality.
It's just that I can understand the argument for having two categories of planets in order to limit the number of the "major" ones, too. Even if the line we draw between normal-sized and dwarf-sized ones happens to be somewhat arbitrary.
But in any case we should be rational and consistent with our definitions. If we want to define Pluto a planet then we must accept any similar object by that definition a Planet, too.
In the mean time you can take comfort in the thought that Pluto is not just any old dwarf-planet but the title-body to a whole class of dwarf-planets: the Plutoids.